PPP 2016 GOP Primary Poll - July 2013 / Rand Paul 1st with 16%

[tsai3904]

National
July 19-21, 2013
500 Republican primary voters
+/-4.3%




Jul (http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2013/07/paul-cruz-rising-for-2016.html)
May (http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2013/05/4-way-tie-for-republicans-clinton-leads-dems.html)
Mar (http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2013/04/paul-on-the-rise-hillary-at-new-high.html)
Feb (http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2013/02/looking-ahead-to-2016-nationally-and-in-iowa.html)
Jan (http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2013/01/clinton-still-tops-for-2016.html)
Dec (http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2012/12/looking-ahead-to-2016.html)


Paul
16%
14%
17%
10%
5%
7%


Bush
13%
15%
12%
13%
14%
12%


Christie
13%
15%
15%
13%
14%
14%


Ryan
13%
9%
12%
15%
16%
12%


Cruz
12%
7%
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a


Rubio
10%
16%
21%
22%
21%
18%


Jindal
4%
3%
4%
4%
3%
n/a


Santorum
4%
5%
5%
n/a
n/a
n/a


Martinez
2%
1%
1%
1%
2%
n/a






Jul
May
Mar


Clinton
43%
47%
46%


Christie
42%
44%
42%








Clinton
46%
n/a
n/a


Ryan
44%
n/a
n/a








Clinton
44%
n/a
n/a


Bush
41%
n/a
n/a








Clinton
45%
51%
49%


Rubio
40%
41%
42%








Clinton
47%
51%
49%


Paul
39%
41%
43%

[Bastiat's The Law]

Those head-to-head national polls are kind of worthless.

[Federico]

AWESOME!!! Being down 8 to Clinton is bad, but running first nationally is more than enough to make up for it.

[Federico]

Those head-to-head national polls are kind of worthless.

Pretty sure that's wrong, why do you think so?

[ObiRandKenobi]

national polls matter in terms of fundraising, public perception.

for ex: romney hit santorum over the head with 'you would lose to obama by 100 points' over and over.

[MRoCkEd]

Rand Paul is the frontrunner for the GOP nomination.

[AlexAmore]

Here's some eye popping stats (for me anyway).

Q3 If you are a woman, press 1. If a man, press 2.
Woman 47%
Man 53%

I'm like "oh bummer, that's what gave Rand the lead."

Then I saw this:

Rand Paul:
Women: 17%
Men: 15%

Wow! Beats everyone with women!

[Federico]

national polls matter in terms of fundraising, public perception.

for ex: romney hit santorum over the head with 'you would lose to obama by 100 points' over and over.

They're also indicative of how the general electorate feels about candidates. That Santorum was getting crushed in head-to-head polls with Obama was both true and important.

[JCDenton0451]

This is the first time Rand leads a national poll. Nice!

Also, LOL at Rubio.

[ObiRandKenobi]

They're also indicative of how the general electorate feels about candidates. That Santorum was getting crushed in in head-to-head polls with Obama was both true and important.

well at some point in 2006 obama was getting crushed in head-to-head polls by everyone.

it's not set in stone.

winning changes everything.
how you carry yourself as you become more well-known changes everything.

[Federico]

well at some point in 2006 obama was getting crushed in head-to-head polls by everyone.

it's not set in stone.

winning changes everything.
how you carry yourself as you become more well-known changes everything.

I agree with all of this; I don't think any of it is in conflict with what I said.

[Brett85]

I hope that Rand's general election numbers improve. Rand's GOP opponents will run ads against him calling him "unelectable" if his numbers in the general election don't get better.

[Federico]

I hope that Rand's general election numbers improve. Rand's GOP opponents will run ads against him calling him "unelectable" if his numbers in the general election don't get better.

Exactly. He needs to find a way to win the support of the people in these polls whose voting preferences look like: Chris Christie > Hillary Clinton > Rand Paul.

[JCDenton0451]

I hope that Rand's general election numbers improve. Rand's GOP opponents will run ads against him calling him "unelectable" if his numbers in the general election don't get better.

Unelectable, because he is just too damn conservative? That's not going to work.

[mwkaufman]

For reference, at this point in the cycle four years ago from a 7/21-7/22 Fox News poll:


Romney 22, Huckabee 21, Palin 17, Giuliani 13, Gingrich 9, Jindal 3

Who'd have thunk Jindal would be the only candidate left four years later?

[Brett85]

Rand is down by more in a general election matchup because he only gets 78% of the Republican vote. Apparently some of the hardcore neocons in the Republican Party are saying that they'll either vote for Hillary or are undecided on who they would vote for in a Rand vs. Hillary race.

[Federico]

Rand is down by more in a general election matchup because he only gets 78% of the Republican vote. Apparently some of the hardcore neocons in the Republican Party are saying that they'll either vote for Hillary or are undecided on who they would vote for in a Rand vs. Hillary race.

That sounds about right. If Rand wins the primary, the hardcore neocons are defecting, and that's a bigger fraction of the Republican party than any of us would like to admit; if we want to have a serious chance in the general, we'll have to win over another group that hasn't been voting (R) in the past.

[Superfly]

Rand is down by more in a general election matchup because he only gets 78% of the Republican vote. Apparently some of the hardcore neocons in the Republican Party are saying that they'll either vote for Hillary or are undecided on who they would vote for in a Rand vs. Hillary race.

I'm really starting to think Rand can siphon a good bit of the independents that have gone Obama so long as he doesn't try to cater to neocons. Leave the hawks behind. That's what would appeal most to the independents and democrats that might actually still give a crap about non intervention and civil liberties.

[Brett85]

The numbers with young voters in the general election are just aweful, not just Rand's numbers but every Republican.

[Federico]

I'm really starting to think Rand can siphon a good bit of the independents that have gone Obama so long as he doesn't try to cater to neocons. Leave the hawks behind. That's what would appeal most to the independents and democrats that might actually still give a crap about non intervention and civil liberties.

I'm not sure that's true, very few independents or Democrats actually give a crap about non intervention and civil liberties.

[Federico]

The numbers with young voters in the general election are just aweful, not just Rand's numbers but every Republican.

I think that might be attributable to the same-sex marriage split. It really is turning into the Civil Rights Movement of our generation. I'm worried Rand might turn out to be just another Goldwater. =(

[AuH20]

I think that might be attributable to the same-sex marriage split. It really is turning into the Civil Rights Movement of our generation. I'm worried Rand might turn out to be just another Goldwater. =(

Young people deserve to be locked to floors at FEMA camps if Gay marriage is their number one issue. Secondly, if Rand is betrayed like Goldwater it won't be his fault. Goldwater was undermined and lied about in a way that it is unconscionable. At one point during the election, they had a highly reputable psychiatric journal write a piece declaring Goldwater to be insane.

[Brett85]

Yeah, this basically sums it up.

Young people:

Gay marriage, important.

Obamacare and the economy, not important.

[Brett85]

...

[AuH20]

...

Milennials suck. Worse than the boomers. Boomers on steroids. Hopefully, the coming generations wise up. A major depression might do the trick.

[Brett85]

Milennials suck. Worse than the boomers. Boomers on steroids. Hopefully, the coming generations wise up. A major depression might do the trick.

Yeah, I think a depression or some kind of economic catastrophe might be the only thing that will actually wake people up. They won't care about gay marriage if they don't have the money to eat.

[JCDenton0451]

Milennials suck. Worse than the boomers. Boomers on steroids. Hopefully, the coming generations wise up. A major depression might do the trick.

What the hell, dude? As a millenial, I can honestly tell I'm proud of my generation. Millenials is the only gen with a favourable view of Edward Snowden. Most of us are fiscally conservative, we're wary of foreign wars and ignore "culture wars". You get the point?

PS: ignore Federico. He is spladle.

[AuH20]

Yeah, I think a depression or some kind of economic catastrophe might be the only thing that will actually wake people up. They won't care about gay marriage if they don't have the money to eat.

Imagine debating with someone about real substantive issues like NSA violations or Fed policy and then they bring up gay marriage?? I'd walk out the room. And this goes for the religious right as well. Gay marriage would be lucky to make the top 25 list of most pressing issues in this country. It's a complete non-issue. I can't believe that a token ceremony and a certificate is swaying large numbers? We are truly up a creak without a paddle.

[Bastiat's The Law]

Pretty sure that's wrong, why do you think so?

Because we're not a direct democracy. We use the electoral college. It certainly helps for name recognition, fund raising, giving a candidate legitimacy, but the electoral college and a handful of swing states will determine the President.

[JCDenton0451]

Imagine debating with someone about real substantive issues like NSA violations or Fed policy and then they bring up gay marriage?? I'd walk out the room. And this goes for the religious right as well. Gay marriage would be lucky to make the top 25 list of most pressing issues in this country. It's a complete non-issue.

Religious Right is far more likely to bring up the "sanctity of marriage". In fact this seems to be the second-biggest issue for the Evangelicals Rand Paul is courting right now. If you don't support gay marriage, most Millenials won't hold it against you. You just don't need to be actively hostile towards it.

[Bastiat's The Law]

That sounds about right. If Rand wins the primary, the hardcore neocons are defecting, and that's a bigger fraction of the Republican party than any of us would like to admit; if we want to have a serious chance in the general, we'll have to win over another group that hasn't been voting (R) in the past.
Independents, young people, crossover dems, etc.

[AuH20]

Rand will be done in by the republican establishment as opposed to white, blue collar dems in the Midwest or Independents. They will pull the plug like they did to Barry Morris Goldwater. Remember that Rockefeller and Co. pulled their support after the contentious convention, which directly led to the rout. You can't have 20% of Republicans simply walk away from your candidacy and possibly crossover to your opponent.

[Brett85]

Religious Right is far more likely to bring up the "sanctity of marriage". In fact this seems to be the second-biggest issue for the Evangelicals Rand Paul is courting right now. If you don't support gay marriage, most Millenials won't hold it against you. You just don't need to be actively hostile towards it.

Then why do you think that Rand is down by 25 points among 18-29 year olds against Hillary in this poll? Do you think that they just have liberal political views across the board?

[T.hill]

I think that might be attributable to the same-sex marriage split. It really is turning into the Civil Rights Movement of our generation. I'm worried Rand might turn out to be just another Goldwater. =(

There are many anti-war/civil liberty-oriented progressives and liberals who are being disenfranchised from the D Party and this current president or who came out en masse to support Rand's secret weapon. Ron Paul.

[Federico]

Young people deserve to be locked to floors at FEMA camps if Gay marriage is their number one issue.

That seems a bit extreme.


Secondly, if Rand is betrayed like Goldwater it won't be his fault. Goldwater was undermined and lied about in a way that it is unconscionable. At one point during the election, they had a highly reputable psychiatric journal write a piece declaring Goldwater to be insane.

I'm not saying it'll be his fault, I'm saying I'm afraid it'll happen to him too. You really think Rand won't be undermined, lied about, and declared insane?

[Federico]

Yeah, this basically sums it up.

Young people:

Gay marriage, important.

Obamacare and the economy, not important.

This is what happens when you expand the franchise to include people who don't own property.

-_-

[Federico]

Milennials suck. Worse than the boomers. Boomers on steroids. Hopefully, the coming generations wise up. A major depression might do the trick.

Pretty sure the last major depression gave us Roosevelt and the New Deal. I'm afraid another will just give us full-blown communism.

[Federico]

Yeah, I think a depression or some kind of economic catastrophe might be the only thing that will actually wake people up. They won't care about gay marriage if they don't have the money to eat.

I agree that gay marriage will seem less important in the event of an economic catastrophe, but I'm less optimistic that it will "wake people up," unless you mean in the sense that Marxism will become a lot more popular.

[Federico]

What the hell, dude? As a millenial, I can honestly tell I'm proud of my generation. Millenials is the only gen with a favourable view of Edward Snowden. Most of us are fiscally conservative, we're wary of foreign wars and ignore "culture wars". You get the point?

Millennials are not ignoring the culture wars, they're front line warriors in them. Cite a source for the claim that millennials are fiscally conservative? Hard to square that with their overwhelming support for Obama.

[Federico]

Imagine debating with someone about real substantive issues like NSA violations or Fed policy and then they bring up gay marriage?? I'd walk out the room. And this goes for the religious right as well. Gay marriage would be lucky to make the top 25 list of most pressing issues in this country. It's a complete non-issue. I can't believe that a token ceremony and a certificate is swaying large numbers? We are truly up a creak without a paddle.

The median American has an IQ of 98.

[Federico]

Because we're not a direct democracy. We use the electoral college. It certainly helps for name recognition, fund raising, giving a candidate legitimacy, but the electoral college and a handful of swing states will determine the President.

I agree with all of this, but I don't think it undermines my point. The national popular vote strongly correlates with the electoral college result.

[Federico]

Independents, young people, crossover dems, etc.

Well, he'd better get started then, because as of now we have a lot of ground to make up.

[Federico]

There are many anti-war/civil liberty-oriented progressives and liberals who are being disenfranchised from the D Party and this current president or who came out en masse to support Rand's secret weapon. Ron Paul.

I hope you're right, but for now they're not helping his poll numbers any.

[supermario21]

Polls are all over the place right now. In Ohio a Quinnipiac poll had Rand tied with Hillary and beating her by 15 with younger voters. PPP has shown good numbers as well. These polls are almost irrelevant.

And as an Ohio millenial, by generation sucks. Big time.

[T.hill]

What the hell, dude? As a millenial, I can honestly tell I'm proud of my generation. Millenials is the only gen with a favourable view of Edward Snowden. Most of us are fiscally conservative, we're wary of foreign wars and ignore "culture wars". You get the point?

PS: ignore Federico. He is spladle.

There's a larger number of millenials with libertarian-leanings then most previous generations, but for the most part they're an increasingly liberal generation. Ron is the cause of our generations unusual support for normally unpopular things. Our generation is definitely not just inherently more independent thinking.

My generation is the most degenerated and intellectually incompetent this world has ever known, beyond just political ramifications.

[supermario21]

Also, what the hell is "moderate" these days? Democratic socialism?

[Federico]

Also, what the hell is "moderate" these days? Democratic socialism?

Depends on your definition of democratic socialism, I suppose. "Moderate" definitely means pro-gun-control, pro-same-sex-marriage, and pro-choice (at least in some instances). These are all positions taken by the median voter, and the Republican party is on the "wrong" (read: less popular) side of all of them.

[KingNothing]

That sounds about right. If Rand wins the primary, the hardcore neocons are defecting, and that's a bigger fraction of the Republican party than any of us would like to admit; if we want to have a serious chance in the general, we'll have to win over another group that hasn't been voting (R) in the past.


There's no way that actual Republican voters leave the party to vote for Hillary. Maybe the neocon "think"tanks will support her, but I can't imagine ANY actual voters doing so.

[Bastiat's The Law]

Rand will be done in by the republican establishment as opposed to white, blue collar dems in the Midwest or Independents. They will pull the plug like they did to Barry Morris Goldwater. Remember that Rockefeller and Co. pulled their support after the contentious convention, which directly led to the rout. You can't have 20% of Republicans simply walk away from your candidacy and possibly crossover to your opponent.
Rand isn't Goldwater and that was 50 years ago. I don't think there's much correlation. I'm sure the neocons will jump ship back to the democratic party from whence they came, but Rand will attract millions of new voters and the neocons won't be there to tarnish the brand.

Welcome to the new age.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eu-xFvLaE68

[Federico]

There's no way that actual Republican voters leave the party to vote for Hillary. Maybe the neocon "think"tanks will support her, but I can't imagine ANY actual voters doing so.

The polls don't bear this out. Actual Republican voters vote Democrat in Presidential elections all the time.

[Federico]

Rand isn't Goldwater and that was 50 years ago. I don't think there's much correlation. I'm sure the neocons will jump ship back to the democratic party from whence they came, but Rand will attract millions of new voters and the neocons won't be there to tarnish the brand.

Fingers crossed!

[helenpaul]

what dopes support rubio?

[RP Supporter]

Rand being down only 8% against Hillary's not so bad. The truth is that would tighten once he became the Republican nominee. Though his opponents would attack him for it. The frontrunner tends to win the nomination, and right now, Rand is the frontrunner.

Rubio seems to be sinking like a stone. In the end, he wasn't as smart as I(or he) thought. He gambled on immigration and lost. I doubt a bill will even pass, and either way, he's sort of branded himself a RINO.

Bush does not really concern me. I think even the base is tired of Bushes. The two I'm concerned about are Christie and Ryan. Ryan has had the highest favorability amongst Republicans in quite a few polls, and he can stake a claim to being next in line. I do doubt that he will run though.

Christie is the one that terrifies me. I think he'll be the one the establishments pushes forward, and say what you will, he's a lot more personable and popular than Romney. And even Romney was able to win the primary. Hopefully the primary voters have learned their lesson.

Meanwhile there's Cruz, looking strong. He could play spoiler between Rand and Christie. I'm unsure if he would, but if he's polling third and stays in the race past Iowa, that's unquestionably a bonus for Christie. Hopefully he'd withdraw and endorse Rand.

[WD-NY]

Millenials is the only gen with a favourable view of Edward Snowden. Most of us are fiscally conservative, we're wary of foreign wars and ignore "culture wars". You get the point?

This.

Rand knows he has the capacity to win the millenial vote by almost as much as Obama did (vs Hillary in the '08 primary) because of his anti-war/NSA/SOPA/PIPA/FISA/Drone-assination/crony-capitalism/etc. and pro-civil liberties positions. He's almost perfectly aligned in all the key issues.

But Team Rand needs start "targeting" millenials ASAP (re: hammering us over the head with perfectly craftly sound-byte talking points) with messaging that makes clear what his positions are on war, drugs, civil liberties, etc. because if they don't, he obama+statist hacks in the media/blogosphere and their army of Alinski-esque comment brigades - which are already in 4th gear - will do it for him.

Waiting until 2014/15 to let millenials on Reddit, HuffPost, Twitter, Facebook, etc. would be a massive blunder imo, on par with Romney's "decision" to not push back against the blitzkrieg of negative attack ads that Team Obama unleashed on him in the spring.

[Brett85]

Christie's stance on gun control should kill his chances in Iowa.

[Havax]

Why does Rand trail Hillary more than these other candidates? Is it due to the mainstream media attacking him lately?

[Brett85]

Why does Rand trail Hillary more than these other candidates? Is it due to the mainstream media attacking him lately?

Maybe it's the Jack Hunter thing.

[TheTyke]

Maybe it's the Jack Hunter thing.

Or maybe it's PPP slanting things to their own benefit. They did this during KY's race, showing Rand down considerably to Conway at a time when Randmania had swept KY, we couldnt keep refill the campaign tables fast enough to satisfy demand. Remember, they're not rated for accuracy until a few weeks before the election. So if they're afraid of Rand, just tweak some weighting general election numbers to make him seem less electable... or better yet, paint the entire party as out of touch with America by knocking their favored candidates.

[Uriah]

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/03/14/is-it-too-early-for-2016-polls/


Identifying the field is one thing, but how have pre-midterm polls done in identifying the eventual nominee? Polls of the Republican contests have been prescient. Since 1988, the early Republican front-runner went on to win the nomination in three of the five open primary campaigns.

In the other two election cycles, 2008 and 2000, the second-place candidate went on to win. In early polls for 2008, Mr. McCain was just two percentage points behind Rudy Giuliani, the former New York mayor whose campaign fizzled once voting began. And in pre-midterm surveys of the 2000 Republican primary, Mr. Bush was five percentage points behind the former Secretary of State Colin Powell, who did not run.

This is a good sign. More at link.

[JCDenton0451]

Why does Rand trail Hillary more than these other candidates? Is it due to the mainstream media attacking him lately?

It's name recongnition mostly at this stage. Ryan and Bush are both better known than Paul and Christie is a favourite among Democrats.

[Brett85]

Rand actually does fairly well with Democrats in this poll. He gets 12%, which is pretty good. He needs to do better among independents and also shore up the Republican base, as he only gets 78% in this poll.

[JCDenton0451]

what dopes support rubio?

Fox News dopes :rolleyes:

We're talking about 65+ old white women primarily.

[Bastiat's The Law]

Christie does well against Hillary because they're virtually the same candidate.

[anaconda]

Rand Paul is the frontrunner for the GOP nomination.

I suspect we won't hear much main stream media coverage of this. If it were Jeb or Rubio it would be the story of the year.

[JCDenton0451]

Then why do you think that Rand is down by 25 points among 18-29 year olds against Hillary in this poll? Do you think that they just have liberal political views across the board?

Well, for starters, Millenials is the "diverse" generation. And minority-millenials vote Democrat for the same reasons minority-boomers vote Democrat - there is no real generational gap there...White millenials is the most libertarian demographic you can find in America. Rand Paul has yet to reach out to them though. He needs to do more to distinguish himself from other Conservative Republicans. White millenials are not liberal, but they have no passion for the 1980s Reaganite Conservatism either.

Needless to say, Rand's Evangelical outreach isn't helping.

[JCDenton0451]

Rand will be done in by the republican establishment as opposed to white, blue collar dems in the Midwest or Independents. They will pull the plug like they did to Barry Morris Goldwater. Remember that Rockefeller and Co. pulled their support after the contentious convention, which directly led to the rout. You can't have 20% of Republicans simply walk away from your candidacy and possibly crossover to your opponent.

I can't say about Goldwater campaign, but Republican establishment nowadays doesn't represent anyone except a few dozens megadonors. If people like Sheldon Adelson and Paul Singer walk away from the Republican party, I'll rejoice.

[DaninPA]

This is what happens when you expand the franchise to include people who don't own property.

-_-

+rep

Add don't pay income tax maybe?

[supermario21]

Well, for starters, Millenials is the "diverse" generation. And minority-millenials vote Democrat for the same reasons minority-boomers vote Democrat - there is no real generational gap there...White millenials is the most libertarian demographic you can find in America. Rand Paul has yet to reach out to them though. He needs to do more to distinguish himself from other Conservative Republicans. White millenials are not liberal, but they have no passion for the 1980s Reaganite Conservatism either.

Needless to say, Rand's Evangelical outreach isn't helping.

I disagree slightly. I'd argue Rand has white millenials already locked up. Millenials are more diverse which is probably why they're more Democratic at this point. Remember Romney won white millenials by 7 or 8 I believe. Rand could probably triple that.

[Federico]

+rep

Add don't pay income tax maybe?

I think the argument for restricting the franchise to people who pay income tax is much weaker than the one for restricting it to property-owners.

[asurfaholic]

Rand will be done in by the republican establishment as opposed to white, blue collar dems in the Midwest or Independents. They will pull the plug like they did to Barry Morris Goldwater. Remember that Rockefeller and Co. pulled their support after the contentious convention, which directly led to the rout. You can't have 20% of Republicans simply walk away from your candidacy and possibly crossover to your opponent.

I stopped reading after here, so If I missed someone else saying this already, sorry

But I don't think 20% of republicans will walk out. Sure some of the hardcore neocons will possibly vote for Hillary, but I think a lot of the voting population is actually the 'vote R because its a Republican' type.

The only thing that could change that would be a full on media spear campaign, which is much more likely to happen.

[JCDenton0451]

I disagree slightly. I'd argue Rand has white millenials already locked up. Millenials are more diverse which is probably why they're more Democratic at this point. Remember Romney won white millenials by 7 or 8 I believe. Rand could probably triple that.

That's a stupid thing to say. Winning 50% of white millenial vote is bad, and Rand must do better than that, but he will need to work to make it happen. White millenials had little enthusiasm in 2012, and turnout was depressed as a result. Rand actually needs to give them a reason to care.

[majinkoola]

Minority millenial men can be won over in much larger numbers than can minority millenial women. Romney did way better with that group than McCain while being basically the same candidate. On the other hand, minority millenial women voted for Obama in 2012 at the same overwhelming numbers as Obama in 2008. If Rand actually came out in favor of pardoning nonviolent drug offenders and ending the federal ban on marijuana, and the message could actually get out there, he'd win over a bunch of people. And I don't think there's that many people who would flip the other way based on that issue.

[KurtBoyer25L]

Well, apparently some of the liberals were right that if anything, the "Neo-Confederate" charge has helped Rand with some white Republicans.

I take a little different POV than some of the posters on this thread. We have always known that any candidate with libertarian views will have to sell out completely (I mean strategy, not "selling out" in the bad sense) to win the primary. Don't forget that much of the public is still ignorant or misinformed about what the Paul platform actually IS. A general vs. Hillary is winnable because so many people will be introduced to true, non-straw man libertarian concepts at that point. Rand is also to the left of Hillary on many issues. A campaign narrative of "Upstart anti-war guy with some hard-right and some hard-left views vs. establishment corporate pro-war politician who won't really change anything" is very winnable.

And I don't believe that neocons will vote for Hillary over Rand after spending a lifetime bashing all Democrats. Some might sit it out, but I don't look for the rank-and-file public to behave like the paranoid writers and military types.

[anaconda]

Rubio's decline is really something. Guess he took one for the (elite) team.

[XTreat]

I think most non-republican voters have a negative veiw of Rand because of his affiliation with the Tparty that gets a lot of negative press.

It is my hope that once Rand gets on stage debating Hillary on civil liberties, war powers, intervention, debt, etc. he will open a lot of eyes. If we can get the nomination he cane go much more libertarian I think the same way neocons go moderate after getting the nom.

or maybe I am dreaming.

[JCDenton0451]

Minority millenial men can be won over in much larger numbers than can minority millenial women. Romney did way better with that group than McCain while being basically the same candidate. On the other hand, minority millenial women voted for Obama in 2012 at the same overwhelming numbers as Obama in 2008. If Rand actually came out in favor of pardoning nonviolent drug offenders and ending the federal ban on marijuana, and the message could actually get out there, he'd win over a bunch of people. And I don't think there's that many people who would flip the other way based on that issue.

Minority millenial women are overwhelmingly black and hispanic single mothers living off welfare. There is nothing a Republican can do to make inroads with this demographic other then try and outbid the Democrat.

If I'm not mistaken 98% of black single mothers voted for Obama in 2012. I can't think of any other voting bloc as monolithic.

[luctor-et-emergo]

“With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night decided to go kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make?”

Is the whole Benghazi thing to the background again ?

[KingNothing]

Well, apparently some of the liberals were right that if anything, the "Neo-Confederate" charge has helped Rand with some white Republicans.

I bet that about 1-percent of people surveyed even knew that dust-up happened.

[liveandletlive]

I think most non-republican voters have a negative veiw of Rand because of his affiliation with the Tparty that gets a lot of negative press.

It is my hope that once Rand gets on stage debating Hillary on civil liberties, war powers, intervention, debt, etc. he will open a lot of eyes. If we can get the nomination he cane go much more libertarian I think the same way neocons go moderate after getting the nom.

or maybe I am dreaming.

its a double edged sword, he must not sound like a typical college libertarian. He must offer up ideas that the American people can believe will work. He is a pragmatist unlike his father, so I have high hopes.

[69360]

Why does Rand trail Hillary more than these other candidates? Is it due to the mainstream media attacking him lately?

MSM sez he's a far right extremist racist. Usual tricks.

If he gets out of the primaries and faces billary head on, he needs a female minority running mate and to crush her in the debates. It shouldn't be hard.

[KEEF]

National
July 19-21, 2013
500 Republican primary voters
+/-4.3%




Jul (http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2013/07/paul-cruz-rising-for-2016.html)
May (http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2013/05/4-way-tie-for-republicans-clinton-leads-dems.html)
Mar (http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2013/04/paul-on-the-rise-hillary-at-new-high.html)
Feb (http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2013/02/looking-ahead-to-2016-nationally-and-in-iowa.html)
Jan (http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2013/01/clinton-still-tops-for-2016.html)
Dec (http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2012/12/looking-ahead-to-2016.html)


Paul
16%
14%
17%
10%
5%
7%


Bush
13%
15%
12%
13%
14%
12%


Christie
13%
15%
15%
13%
14%
14%


Ryan
13%
9%
12%
15%
16%
12%


Cruz
12%
7%
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a


Rubio
10%
16%
21%
22%
21%
18%


Jindal
4%
3%
4%
4%
3%
n/a


Santorum
4%
5%
5%
n/a
n/a
n/a


Martinez
2%
1%
1%
1%
2%
n/a




Just found a picture online of the potential candidates who placed below Rand in this most recent poll. I did notice that they left Ted Cruz off of these pictures.
http://www.brianphickey.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/250px-Bristol_Stool_Chart.png

[Carlybee]

I think most non-republican voters have a negative veiw of Rand because of his affiliation with the Tparty that gets a lot of negative press.

Yep..I saw a lib refer to him as a "Baggertarian".

[JJ2]

I don't understand why gay marriage should be a problem for Rand. He has the exact same position as Obama: let the states decide.

Regarding Cruz, I think it's insane that people are even talking about someone who was born in Canada to a non-American father being able to run for President. Have we really sunk that low?

[Keith and stuff]

I don't understand why gay marriage should be a problem for Rand. He has the exact same position as Obama: let the states decide.

Regarding Cruz, I think it's insane that people are even talking about someone who was born in Canada to a non-American father being able to run for President. Have we really sunk that low?
So you weren't 1 of the many Republicans hoping to amend the Constitution to allow Teminator to run? After all, if he could get elected twice in CA, surely he would have won nationally, right?

[anaconda]

Rand will be done in by the republican establishment as opposed to white, blue collar dems in the Midwest or Independents. They will pull the plug like they did to Barry Morris Goldwater. Remember that Rockefeller and Co. pulled their support after the contentious convention, which directly led to the rout. You can't have 20% of Republicans simply walk away from your candidacy and possibly crossover to your opponent.

Maybe Rand will have to gamble on pulling back the curtain and making the case to the voters that they are being swindled by big money and a corporate media.

[anaconda]

Yep..I saw a lib refer to him as a "Baggertarian".

^Sounds like a standard Huffington Post comment.

[Brett85]

I don't understand why gay marriage should be a problem for Rand. He has the exact same position as Obama: let the states decide.

His position is the same as Cruz's position, that marriage should be between a man and a woman, but the issue should be decided by the states.

[jtstellar]

I think most non-republican voters have a negative veiw of Rand because of his affiliation with the Tparty that gets a lot of negative press.

It is my hope that once Rand gets on stage debating Hillary on civil liberties, war powers, intervention, debt, etc. he will open a lot of eyes. If we can get the nomination he cane go much more libertarian I think the same way neocons go moderate after getting the nom.

or maybe I am dreaming.

most of those also turn a blind eye to obama foreign occupations.. question is what can you do to please them.