Rand Paul leads Hillary Clinton 45%-43% in latest New Hampshire poll - wins independents by 8%

[LatinsforPaul]

RandPaul leads @HillaryClinton 45%-43% in latest New Hampshire poll -- wins independents by 8%

DURHAM, N.H. —Four of five Republican presidential candidates in New Hampshire chosen for a new poll match up strongly against Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton in New Hampshire. The only Republican she leads by a substantial margin is the GOP frontrunner.

A WMUR Granite State Poll released Wednesday evening shows Clinton leading business executive Donald Trump 50 percent to 40 percent, with 7 percent undecided.

Three other GOP candidates chosen for the poll have 1 or 2 percentage point leads over the Democrat, and one Republican trails her by a single percentage point. All four of those close matchups are well within the poll’s margin of error of 3.6 percentage points, making them statistical ties.

Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush leads Clinton 46 percent to 45 percent, while U.S. Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky and Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker both lead her 45 to 43 percent. U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida trails Clinton 44 percent to 43 percent.

[Lord Xar]

shhhhh.... we can't have this getting out!!!! JEB is the ANNOINTED ONE!

bombs awayyyyyyy

[rich34]

shhhhh.... we can't have this getting out!!!! JEB is the ANNOINTED ONE!

bombs awayyyyyyy

Yeah really lol... Did you guys' notice once the other top 3 candidates pulled even or ahead of Hillary in a couple battleground states it suddenly became news. However Rand beating her in at least 5 battleground states and has been for some time just doesn't seem to be newsworthy... I sure hope Rand points this out during the debates and does so numerously. Not only mentioning it, but even explaining how he's been beating her in those states the whole time, but the MSM choose not to report it. Rand really needs to show the people that he is the true anti-establishment candidate and has demonstrated it time and time again. With the base of support that Rand has from his father, they know it won't take that much crossover support from traditional republicans to propel Rand into winning the nomination.

[hells_unicorn]

Mark my words, Trump's campaign will implode sometime before the Iowa Caucus. He may hang on until the end of this year, but he does not have the staying power that everybody thinks he does, and he is going to mess up royally at some point during either this debate or the next one.

I put more stock in Walker getting the nomination than Trump, and if given the choice between the two of them, I'd take Walker, and I'm not exactly a huge fan of his.

[CPUd]

One of these things is not like the other:

[EBounding]

Mark my words, Trump's campaign will implode sometime before the Iowa Caucus. He may hang on until the end of this year, but he does not have the staying power that everybody thinks he does, and he is going to mess up royally at some point during either this debate or the next one.

I put more stock in Walker getting the nomination than Trump, and if given the choice between the two of them, I'd take Walker, and I'm not exactly a huge fan of his.

I agree. T-rump will deflate once the other candidates spend a little time campaigning against him. It won't take much: gun-control, single-payer healthcare, immigration flip-flop, done. He'll still have enough of a following though to be troublesome until Iowa.

T-rump aside, Walker is the real anti-establishment candidate right now. Rand needs to take that role soon.

[CPUd]

Walker could take a lot of the 2012 Santorum states, but he would have to win Iowa first.

[idiom]

Mark my words, Trump's campaign will implode sometime before the Iowa Caucus. He may hang on until the end of this year, but he does not have the staying power that everybody thinks he does, and he is going to mess up royally at some point during either this debate or the next one.

I put more stock in Walker getting the nomination than Trump, and if given the choice between the two of them, I'd take Walker, and I'm not exactly a huge fan of his.

Trump only implodes if someone else starts speaking truth to power in some form. While he has a lock on that fauz pas just make him look stronger and more down to earth.

[hells_unicorn]

Trump only implodes if someone else starts speaking truth to power in some form. While he has a lock on that fauz pas just make him look stronger and more down to earth.

He'll implode the minute people look for elaboration on his ideas, regardless of who speaks truth or half-truth to whatever. You can only pontificate platitudes from a podium for so long before logic starts entering the equation again. He won't implode because of any type of attack from his competitors, it will be mostly self-inflicted, though with some help from his own past to augment any near future blunders.

P.S. - Apologies for the alliteration.

[Dianne]

That's why FAUX is going to try and take him out tomorrow night.. Mark my words.. they will go after him hard and heavy tomorrow night to save Bush.

[hells_unicorn]

That's why FAUX is going to try and take him out tomorrow night.. Mark my words.. they will go after him hard and heavy tomorrow night to save Bush.

If they really want to save Bush they'll need to give him a brain transplant because he's a stuttering mess and a gaffe machine the minute he goes off-script. But I do agree that they will go after Trump hard, and whether or not he can keep his cool when this happens will determine how long he lasts.

[Jackie Moon]

Mark my words, Trump's campaign will implode sometime before the Iowa Caucus. He may hang on until the end of this year, but he does not have the staying power that everybody thinks he does, and he is going to mess up royally at some point during either this debate or the next one.

Completely agree.

[David Sadler]

That's why FAUX is going to try and take him out tomorrow night.. Mark my words.. they will go after him hard and heavy tomorrow night to save Bush.

Trump will note the hardball questions to himself and the softball questions to his rivals and then take it to the moderators. Trump will not be played for the chump.

[Dianne]

Mark my words, Trump's campaign will implode sometime before the Iowa Caucus. He may hang on until the end of this year, but he does not have the staying power that everybody thinks he does, and he is going to mess up royally at some point during either this debate or the next one.

I put more stock in Walker getting the nomination than Trump, and if given the choice between the two of them, I'd take Walker, and I'm not exactly a huge fan of his.

Agree, but in a couple of other subjects in the forum; I state Trump is a place holder for Bush. Possibly a place holder for Clinton.. He is not a serious candidate, he is reflecting all the hard hits in protection of someone. I believe it is Jeb.

[Dianne]

Mark my words, Trump's campaign will implode sometime before the Iowa Caucus. He may hang on until the end of this year, but he does not have the staying power that everybody thinks he does, and he is going to mess up royally at some point during either this debate or the next one.

I put more stock in Walker getting the nomination than Trump, and if given the choice between the two of them, I'd take Walker, and I'm not exactly a huge fan of his.

Agree, but in a couple of other subjects in the forum; I state Trump is a place holder for Bush. Possibly a place holder for Clinton.. He is not a serious candidate, he is reflecting all the hard hits in protection of someone. I believe it is Jeb.

[hells_unicorn]

Agree, but in a couple of other subjects in the forum; I state Trump is a place holder for Bush. Possibly a place holder for Clinton.. He is not a serious candidate, he is reflecting all the hard hits in protection of someone. I believe it is Jeb.

Maybe so, maybe not, I'm less concerned about Trump's motives at this juncture and more so in how his presence is shaping the race, and the people he is largely grabbing are disaffected Paleo-conservatives and nationalists, most of whom are not supporters of Jeb, so while it's possible Trump might be covering for Jeb in a media sense, or in the tank for Hillary, the people supporting him and giving him his numbers are not Bush supporters.

I don't support Rand going after Trump or even acknowledging him, as this would hurt him with the people that are under him. Technically I don't support Rand going after anybody unless he gets hit first, but if he is to punch up, he should focus specifically on Jeb.

[eleganz]

Maybe so, maybe not, I'm less concerned about Trump's motives at this juncture and more so in how his presence is shaping the race, and the people he is largely grabbing are disaffected Paleo-conservatives and nationalists, most of whom are not supporters of Jeb, so while it's possible Trump might be covering for Jeb in a media sense, or in the tank for Hillary, the people supporting him and giving him his numbers are not Bush supporters.

I don't support Rand going after Trump or even acknowledging him, as this would hurt him with the people that are under him. Technically I don't support Rand going after anybody unless he gets hit first, but if he is to punch up, he should focus specifically on Jeb.

I'd be surprised to see Rand go off of his current script, which is to compare himself with Hillary.

[georgiaboy]

bump - something about peaking at the right time!

[Dianne]

Rand needs to hammer this all night long in the debate !!!