Fox News National Poll: Rand Paul at 2%

[rich34]

How is Patiki have 1% and Rand had 2%. I'm bewildered

Exactly! Not to mention Kasich, Christie, and Carly ahead of Rand?? Just who the hell are they polling?

[opinionatedfool]

Beginning to get VERY depressed... Rand's going to need a couple of 5's just to get back in.

this sucks. only hope is looking like getting better than expected participation in iowa. maybe the students will take us through

[CaptUSA]

Polls are not designed to reflect public opinion; they are designed to create it.

The sad part is that they are really successful at it. The only antidote is to make the public not trust the polls. The way to do that is to win in spite of the polls. It's happened over and over and yet the media still treats the polls as gospel. But their time is coming to an end. Maybe not for 2016, but soon enough.

[AngryCanadian]

I think we can learn something from the Tea Party movement. One thing they did better than us was focusing on the message, instead of a particular candidate. Gotta stir up a new movement that lays a foundation for what we think the party should stand for. I understand where you are coming from, though. It's very frustrating.

You cant argue facts, blowbacks with the stupid and trump and people like him understand each other. The only one way you can change their minds is through reality.

[PaulConventionWV]

I bet walking off stage at the next debate by Rand and saying they deserve Hillary Clinton in 2016 would be worth at least 5% in the polls. Or at least the media attention it'd bring.

I agree. He would lose at least 5%, meaning he would go down to -3%.

[liveandletlive]

id stick around, dont leave the country. but yea, theres no positive spin to this. Trump will lose, and lose badly to Hillary.

[PaulConventionWV]

id stick around, dont leave the country. but yea, theres no positive spin to this. Trump will lose, and lose badly to Hillary.

Too late.

[devil21]

So they totally ignore the guy who wanted to declare war on ISIS. And they ignore the guy who has made it clear why we have the ISIS mess to begin with.

People are simply not paying attention and/or brainwashed.

Or maybe it's that the polls are rigged bull$#@! that purposely minimize demographics where Rand's highest support resides.

[derek4ever]

Polling is just manipulation by the big kahunas to dismiss any possibility for an anti-establishment candidate to rise and surge unless you play their game!

[HVACTech]

Polling is just manipulation by the big kahunas to dismiss any possibility for an anti-establishment candidate to rise and surge unless you play their game!

is that why you bumped this post?

BUMP!

[devil21]

A Hot Christmas gift this year. I encourage everyone to buy one.

[JohnCollins]

Rand should go Indy. Just like I said Ron should have back in 2011/12. The media would then pay the $#@! attention and the people would have a real option to vote for in a 2 way race.

Dem/Rep (same pile of $#@!) vs Indy Rand Paul

He already pledged to support the nominee, so it would be inappropriate for him to go back on his word.

[WTLaw]

He already pledged to support the nominee, so it would be inappropriate for him to go back on his word.

Yes that would be awkward considering how Rand opened the 1st debate. But it would't be bad maybe if Rand refused to endorse another.

And maybe, should Rand lose the primary, we will see the LP nominate someone to give us a name we can scribble down.

[PCKY]

Yes, this poll sucks. ISiS, for all intents and purposes, beheaded Rand just 3 days after a stellar debate performance. These polls sponsored by news outlets always seem to reflect the narrative they all push. Sorry, Fox, it should be fair and unbalanced, because at every turn you beat the war drums.
Rand's opponents, with the exception of Lindsey Graham, are all using disengenuous rhetoric. They claim to "defeat ISIS" but they don't say how, or how much it will cost. Rand is remaining intellectually honest and I appreciate that.
Let us not be sunshine patriots! My support will not waiver and I will redouble my efforts to shut them all up in Iowa.
What say you, RPF? Will you stay the course and push Rand at every turn to get victory in Iowa?

[Sola_Fide]

Yay. Another Fox news poll that craps on Rand.

[nikcers]

Rand Paul needs to keep up his blow against Trump. He almost destroyed him in the debate but then he let him live. Trump has no idea what he is talking about when it comes to macroeconomics. Rand Paul is also way more electable in the general election. Trump suffers from the same general election problem Mitt Romney did in 2012. Trump will say Trump is a job creator, and the democrats will say no he is an immigrant job creator.

Joe Biden doesn't have to be in the race for them to say it here is the attack. Don't Tell me what you value, show me your budget, and I'll tell you what you value. Trump doesn't buy American labor, his company goes out of their way not to buy American he doesn't value America the economy that helped him become wealthier. They will tell him that he didn't build it because he was given 300 million by his dad while the American economy and his crony business practices built the rest. The polls are theater at this point otherwise Jeb Bush would of dropped out by now.

[KEEF]

Yes, this poll sucks. ISiS, for all intents and purposes, beheaded Rand just 3 days after a stellar debate performance. These polls sponsored by news outlets always seem to reflect the narrative they all push. Sorry, Fox, it should be fair and unbalanced, because at every turn you beat the war drums.
Rand's opponents, with the exception of Lindsey Graham, are all using disengenuous rhetoric. They claim to "defeat ISIS" but they don't say how, or how much it will cost. Rand is remaining intellectually honest and I appreciate that.
Let us not be sunshine patriots! My support will not waiver and I will redouble my efforts to shut them all up in Iowa.
What say you, RPF? Will you stay the course and push Rand at every turn to get victory in Iowa?

I-OH-AH!

I-OH-AH!

I-OH-AH!

[WTLaw]

Yes, this poll sucks. ISiS, for all intents and purposes, beheaded Rand just 3 days after a stellar debate performance. These polls sponsored by news outlets always seem to reflect the narrative they all push. Sorry, Fox, it should be fair and unbalanced, because at every turn you beat the war drums.
Rand's opponents, with the exception of Lindsey Graham, are all using disengenuous rhetoric. They claim to "defeat ISIS" but they don't say how, or how much it will cost. Rand is remaining intellectually honest and I appreciate that.
Let us not be sunshine patriots! My support will not waiver and I will redouble my efforts to shut them all up in Iowa.
What say you, RPF? Will you stay the course and push Rand at every turn to get victory in Iowa?

Nice post. I am hoping the shelf life of the ISIS story is shorter than we are currently anticipating, after all, the Charlie Hebdo attack after a while fell into the background. Thanksgiving and Christmas will make Paris seem less vital in a month.

Fox News --lol -- treats Frank Luntz as if he were a legitimate pollster. Everyone knows that his surveys are a charade, and that is public tip of the iceberg. It actually would make sense the polls that are less transparent and even less fair than Luntz' debate night surveys. Remember, Foxnews misled its supporters all the way up to election day 2012. Real polls showed that Mitt was gonna lose. Dick Morris, as I recall, so much as admitted that it was to keep the base charged up hoping for a miracle. This all is a good reason to continue to press Rand into the fray until the convention. After that, we can send them a message by not supporting Cruz or Rubio. But if Rand is pulling %2, he really has %5. And if he has %5 with the optics as bad as they are now (nobody likes a losing campaign) he can actually have %15. And with that, he can win Iowa. And in order to change the GOP, we must change the platform and you do that by nominating the only liberty candidate.

[PCKY]

Nice post. I am hoping the shelf life of the ISIS story is shorter than we are currently anticipating, after all, the Charlie Hebdo attack after a while fell into the background. Thanksgiving and Christmas will make Paris seem less vital in a month.

Fox News --lol -- treats Frank Luntz as if he were a legitimate pollster. Everyone knows that his surveys are a charade, and that is public tip of the iceberg. It actually would make sense the polls that are less transparent and even less fair than Luntz' debate night surveys. Remember, Foxnews misled its supporters all the way up to election day 2012. Real polls showed that Mitt was gonna lose. Dick Morris, as I recall, so much as admitted that it was to keep the base charged up hoping for a miracle. This all is a good reason to continue to press Rand into the fray until the convention. After that, we can send them a message by not supporting Cruz or Rubio. But if Rand is pulling %2, he really has %5. And if he has %5 with the optics as bad as they are now (nobody likes a losing campaign) he can actually have %15. And with that, he can win Iowa. And in order to change the GOP, we must change the platform and you do that by nominating the only liberty candidate.

Here here! The Fox News folly of 2012 is why I support Rand now! Turned me into a total activist. We must fire up the base and demonstrate to all Liberty supporters that Rand's message is the only one worth listening to.
BTW I clearly remember Britt Hume confidently proclaiming in 2008 that since Hillary raised the most money she was all but guaranteed the nomination. I guess we know how that worked out. I will follow my heart this time and support the candidate who supports me. That candidate is Rand Paul!

[nikcers]

Yes that would be awkward considering how Rand opened the 1st debate. But it would't be bad maybe if Rand refused to endorse another.

And maybe, should Rand lose the primary, we will see the LP nominate someone to give us a name we can scribble down.

Trump just threatened to go third party Rand needs to Run with the opposite he needs declare if Trump runs third party he will unite independents and republicans to beat Trump and Clinton on the Republican Ticket because he is a lifelong republican.

[dude58677]

That's ok. Most voters aren't decided.

[WTLaw]

Just getting back to the maybe less than expected staying power of the Paris attacks, remember when supposedly Assad gassed all those children and everybody was talking about a red line and I guess it looked like war with Syria was inevitable? Well, at least a large invasion was avoided and Americans surprised everyone by being more war weary than we thought. Maybe, should Rand get into the debate, he can be the voice of reason. He is the only one who can. We arent crazy, the rest of the field does sound pretty stupid when they open their mouths.

[Peace&Freedom]

Just getting back to the maybe less than expected staying power of the Paris attacks, remember when supposedly Assad gassed all those children and everybody was talking about a red line and I guess it looked like war with Syria was inevitable? Well, at least a large invasion was avoided and Americans surprised everyone by being more war weary than we thought. Maybe, should Rand get into the debate, he can be the voice of reason. He is the only one who can. We arent crazy, the rest of the field does sound pretty stupid when they open their mouths.

All that is good to point out, but until we run candidates who are the liberty voice of emotion as well as reason, we'll keep losing. It's like the game rock-paper-scissors, where reason is the rock, paper is emotion and scissors is pain. Ron and Rand can run on the rock of reason and peace, but demagogic emotion ("we're under threat," fear, fear fear, more war until we win, etc) will overwhelm it every time. Two years ago, when the warhawks tried to crank up a war on Syria with phony claims Assad had launched a chemical attack, the world turned off the drumbeat by flatly calling the claim a scam, and standing firm---and so must do again.

We have to confront the emotional pro-war framework papering over the truth, by rejecting the premise behind the framework---we have to say NO, we've been lied to, there is no real threat, ISIS/Al Qaeda are CIA created enemies, the WOT is a fraud to justify empire building the US had already long planned to do. The "we've been lied to" meme can act as scissors to cut through the emotionalism, and break the spell the War party puts on everybody with each new false flag. The pain of realizing you've been conned is known to wake people up, so they can hear reason again. But if Rand won't call the war whoopers on their latest fraud, the emotional pro-war narrative will continue to stand, and smother reason.

[Feelgood]

$#@! you FRANK!

[PaulConventionWV]

Or maybe it's that the polls are rigged bull$#@! that purposely minimize demographics where Rand's highest support resides.

Yeah, and maybe Ron Paul was really the frontrunner the whole time. I guess we will never know....

Oh, wait, we actually do know.

But hey, maybe you're right. Either way, it doesn't make things any more promising.

[PaulConventionWV]

Yes, this poll sucks. ISiS, for all intents and purposes, beheaded Rand just 3 days after a stellar debate performance. These polls sponsored by news outlets always seem to reflect the narrative they all push. Sorry, Fox, it should be fair and unbalanced, because at every turn you beat the war drums.
Rand's opponents, with the exception of Lindsey Graham, are all using disengenuous rhetoric. They claim to "defeat ISIS" but they don't say how, or how much it will cost. Rand is remaining intellectually honest and I appreciate that.
Let us not be sunshine patriots! My support will not waiver and I will redouble my efforts to shut them all up in Iowa.
What say you, RPF? Will you stay the course and push Rand at every turn to get victory in Iowa?

Call me what you will. I am disillusioned with the process.

[alucard13mm]

Neocons and bleeding hearts liberal use emotion to force $#@! on everyone.