Des Moines, IA - Ron Paul Within A Point Of Newt Gingrich In Iowa: Poll |
|
| |
Published on:
December 13, 2011 06:36 PM
Text Size
|
|
Des Moines, IA - Don’t place that final bet yet in the Republican Iowa primary - a new poll shows Texas Libertarian Congressman Ron Paul closing in on frontrunner Newt Gingrich.
Advertisement:
Over the past week, Gingrich’s 9-point lead has shrunk to a single point over the folksy Paul, according to Public Policy Poling.
Gingrich is clinging to a narrow 22% to 21% edge over Paul, with Mitt Romney at 16%, Michele Bachmann at 11%, Rick Perry at 9%, Rick Santorum at 8%, Jon Huntsman at 5%, and Gary Johnson at 1%.
Gingrich has dropped 5 points in the last week and he’s also seen a significant decline in his favorability numbers.
Full story at The NY Daily News 
More of today's headlines
“New York, NY - A lawyer for The New York Times has sent a message to the New York Police Department's head spokesman to express disappointment about the treatment of a...” New York, NY - NYT Sends NYPD Note Over Treatment of Photographer
Newark, NJ - NJ Doctors Arrested In Alleged Kickback Scheme
Total26
Read Comments (26) — Post Yours »
1
Dec 13, 2011 at 06:44 PM Facts1 Says:Report as Inappropriate
If not for his policy on Israel, I would vote for him.
2
Dec 13, 2011 at 06:59 PM yaakov321 Says:Report as Inappropriate
When a counter revolutionary like Ron Paul lines up head to head with the Newt, I think its safe to assume that the GOP voters have no concept of intelligent design and trust in a higher power.
3
Dec 13, 2011 at 06:59 PM TheRealJoe123 Says:Report as Inappropriate
“ If not for his policy on Israel, I would vote for him. ”
His Israel policy isn't so clear cut one way or the other, don't forget that it was Nixon someone not known for his love for Jewish people who helped Israel in their time of need against the advice of his main Jewish adviser, my main worry about Paul is whom is he going to appoint to senior positions? that's the key.
With all that said I am not planing on voting for him unless its him V.S Obama.
4
Dec 13, 2011 at 08:18 PM marty_ Says:Report as Inappropriate
“ If not for his policy on Israel, I would vote for him. ”
his policy on Israel is probably the most beneficial to israel. To sum it up: 'get out of israel's way and stop blackmailing them with financial aid. israel doesn't need americas help and more often than not it ends up harming israel (and america can't afford it). In addition to cutting aid to israel he proposes cutting aid to all arab nations. I think his stance is great for americ and israel...
to eac his own...
5
Dec 13, 2011 at 08:26 PM mutti Says:Report as Inappropriate
“ If not for his policy on Israel, I would vote for him. ”
yea? you would? he's a libetarian if he's voted in he will want to cut off all sec 8, foodstamps, wic etc. and you will have to go get a -wait for it- joooooooooooob!!!!
6
Dec 13, 2011 at 08:28 PM Brian Says:Report as Inappropriate
My #1 Choice: Bachmann
My #2 Choice: Paul
7
Dec 13, 2011 at 09:08 PM Anonymous Says:Report as Inappropriate
“ If not for his policy on Israel, I would vote for him. ”
who is better for israel, newt or ron paul? and why?
8
Dec 13, 2011 at 09:28 PM yeedle Says:Report as Inappropriate
If such a nut can win election in america we need to run to china
He will blame jews and israel for all the catastrophes in the world
9
Dec 13, 2011 at 09:56 PM Avigdor Says:Report as Inappropriate
“ If not for his policy on Israel, I would vote for him. ”
There is nothing wrong with his policy on Israel, in fact it's perfect. Leave Israel alone and don't be the world's policeman. It's the constant involvement in the Mideast that has been the problem with US policy. This isn't 1973 - Israel is armed this time. And besides, he hasn't said that he wouldn't come to the aid of Israel in an emergency, only that the US has no business in trying to make the peace. And as for financial support, Israel no longer needs it and he would cut everyone - including Egypt - off. Sounds good to me.
10
Dec 13, 2011 at 10:17 PM Facts1 Says:Report as Inappropriate
“ yea? you would? he's a libetarian if he's voted in he will want to cut off all sec 8, foodstamps, wic etc. and you will have to go get a -wait for it- joooooooooooob!!!! ”
So will all my taxes, so I can finally get a real paying Job and find a decent apartment at a decent rate.
Everything will come down.
11
Dec 13, 2011 at 10:19 PM Babishka Says:Report as Inappropriate
The entire GOP lineup is crazypants. I am voting for Obama.
12
Dec 13, 2011 at 10:20 PM Facts1 Says:Report as Inappropriate
“ There is nothing wrong with his policy on Israel, in fact it's perfect. Leave Israel alone and don't be the world's policeman. It's the constant involvement in the Mideast that has been the problem with US policy. This isn't 1973 - Israel is armed this time. And besides, he hasn't said that he wouldn't come to the aid of Israel in an emergency, only that the US has no business in trying to make the peace. And as for financial support, Israel no longer needs it and he would cut everyone - including Egypt - off. Sounds good to me. ”
Its not as simple.
He never really showed any support for Israel in any way and has suggested at the third debate that we befriend Iran. I am not so sure he would have even gotten involved in WWII.
As for the local issues, he's my man. I can finally get some real freedom.
13
Dec 13, 2011 at 10:42 PM Realistic thinker Says:Report as Inappropriate
This guy is radical and crazy and running for the longest time ha has no actuall chance of winning it!! He thinks were not in a war against terrorism I dont want to have to be reminded the hard way!!
14
Dec 13, 2011 at 10:49 PM SammyL Says:Report as Inappropriate
Paul adds a lot to the debate. His Libertarian views resonate with many Libertarian Conservatives like myself. His foreign policy, however, is isolationist. Not very realistic in today's world. I want him to stick around but I'd still prefer Newt or even Romney.
15
Dec 13, 2011 at 11:33 PM SherryTheNoahide Says:Report as Inappropriate
“ The entire GOP lineup is crazypants. I am voting for Obama. ”
I 2nd that, Babishka! (lol)
16
Dec 14, 2011 at 07:44 AM Buchwalter Says:Report as Inappropriate
“ There is nothing wrong with his policy on Israel, in fact it's perfect. Leave Israel alone and don't be the world's policeman. It's the constant involvement in the Mideast that has been the problem with US policy. This isn't 1973 - Israel is armed this time. And besides, he hasn't said that he wouldn't come to the aid of Israel in an emergency, only that the US has no business in trying to make the peace. And as for financial support, Israel no longer needs it and he would cut everyone - including Egypt - off. Sounds good to me. ”
You are wrong his policy is non-intervention and in an emergency fine Jews like you will have to flock to the IDF and carry whatever implement is necessary. His social policy would throw back this country to the Chicago stock yard mentality and create great social havoc. Non-intervention means not to intervene in any situation, of course he is for eliminating section 8, food stamps etc and eliminating all other government regulations and voila gambling on wall street full steam ahead. Don't forget foreign aid will be cut and the lack thereof I am sure you will compensate from the gains you accumulate with his fiscal policy.
17
Dec 14, 2011 at 08:10 AM concerned_Jew Says:Report as Inappropriate
If America pulls out of the international scene, what other country will fill the vaccum? Russia, China, Iran? the vaccum that will be created by the US becoming isolationist will allow another power to move in and take over the world. If the US had not been so isolationist during the 30's maybe 6 million of our people would not have died. Do you want to create another such situation? That is what Paul is advocating. If you've willing to take a chance, go for it!
18
Dec 14, 2011 at 10:46 AM Aryeh Says:Report as Inappropriate
America spends close to 45% of overseas military money, more than any other nation. America currently gives more money to other nations than all the other world contributions combined. Are we really serving our own rational self interest by this? Do we need troops in Japan, Australia, Germany and Jordan? Do we need to give as much military aid to the enemies of Israel (Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia) as we do to Israel?
Without the bribery of Washington, Israel would have destroyed Iraq during the Gulf War I. Israel would have decisively taken action to secure the borders with the PA, and would have destroyed the Iranian nuclear program.
What exactly is wrong with Ron Paul's foreign policy? It is EXACTLY the position of the NSA, the CIA and the Department of State, he is just not afraid to say it, even if it costs him the election G-d forbid.
19
Dec 14, 2011 at 09:26 AM SherryTheNoahide Says:Report as Inappropriate
This guy is mamash a complete lunatic! Have any of you heard the agencies he wants to destroy?! Ones like the Dept of Education (which some of you may not care about cuz your kids are in Yeshivas... but is something the other 200million plus need to worry about!), the Dept of Commerce & the EPA?! Um, you know... the environmental protection agency that makes sure we have clean air & clean water?! Yikes!
He wants us all to be left to the mercy of private industries to regulate that stuff?! What?! Are we really supposed to trust that companies would protect us all?!
Have any of you ever seen the movie "Michael Clayton"? (lol) Enough said!
Ron Paul would be a disaster! Not because I can't stand the guy! He's likeable, is a family man, etc. I have no issue w\that.
But his policies... oh my goodness! (:-o
Not to mention the stuff he says about Israel! Aaaah!
I don't know what clown up on that GOP stage would be "better" than Ron Paul... but they certainly can't be worse! A vote for Ron Paul would absolutely be a vote against some of the poorest in society. Huge disaster!
But oh well! Keep nominating people like this... and you'll only secure an Obama victory!
20
Dec 14, 2011 at 09:42 AM PMOinFL Says:Report as Inappropriate
“ My #1 Choice: Bachmann
My #2 Choice: Paul ”
Your #1 choice is Bachmann? G-d help you.
Go over to politifact and check her out. You'll find that most of the things she claims are 100% false and they will provide you with documentation and sourcing to back it all up. Any American who is supporting Bachmann, Palin or Perry is either not up-to-date on the analysis of these candidates, or is a complete imbecile. I will assume you are just not up-to-date.
21
Dec 14, 2011 at 11:25 AM anonymous Says:Report as Inappropriate
“ There is nothing wrong with his policy on Israel, in fact it's perfect. Leave Israel alone and don't be the world's policeman. It's the constant involvement in the Mideast that has been the problem with US policy. This isn't 1973 - Israel is armed this time. And besides, he hasn't said that he wouldn't come to the aid of Israel in an emergency, only that the US has no business in trying to make the peace. And as for financial support, Israel no longer needs it and he would cut everyone - including Egypt - off. Sounds good to me. ”
You are right we will not be the world's policeman and I am sure you would hurry to protect this country in the event of emergency. I wonder who would replace the military assistance given to Israel and the German gift regarding the latest Dolphin class submarine to Israel. His candidacy will make it smooth and easy for President's Obama re-election
22
Dec 14, 2011 at 11:37 AM anonymous Says:Report as Inappropriate
“ America spends close to 45% of overseas military money, more than any other nation. America currently gives more money to other nations than all the other world contributions combined. Are we really serving our own rational self interest by this? Do we need troops in Japan, Australia, Germany and Jordan? Do we need to give as much military aid to the enemies of Israel (Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia) as we do to Israel?
Without the bribery of Washington, Israel would have destroyed Iraq during the Gulf War I. Israel would have decisively taken action to secure the borders with the PA, and would have destroyed the Iranian nuclear program.
What exactly is wrong with Ron Paul's foreign policy? It is EXACTLY the position of the NSA, the CIA and the Department of State, he is just not afraid to say it, even if it costs him the election G-d forbid. ”
His policy was implemented in 1918 and gave the road free or as the German sang die Strasse frei to Hitler, Goering, Goebbels and Himmler and ultimately caused the annihilation of millions of Jews including my family and sent me to the concentration camp. Sanity will prevail
23
Dec 14, 2011 at 12:45 PM clear-thinker Says:Report as Inappropriate
“ Your #1 choice is Bachmann? G-d help you.
Go over to politifact and check her out. You'll find that most of the things she claims are 100% false and they will provide you with documentation and sourcing to back it all up. Any American who is supporting Bachmann, Palin or Perry is either not up-to-date on the analysis of these candidates, or is a complete imbecile. I will assume you are just not up-to-date. ”
And to all those Paul backers who claim to be pro Israel. I assume you are not up to date, and don't understand what his views on Iran etc. actually mean
24
Dec 14, 2011 at 12:48 PM anonymous Says:Report as Inappropriate
“ My #1 Choice: Bachmann
My #2 Choice: Paul ”
your choices reveal a lot about your world outlook, knowledge of history and where you stand in the Jewish community. I hope you will be kind enough and give her a primer in history
25
Dec 14, 2011 at 04:29 PM PMOinFL Says:Report as Inappropriate
“ And to all those Paul backers who claim to be pro Israel. I assume you are not up to date, and don't understand what his views on Iran etc. actually mean ”
Why are you attacking me? I don't support Ron Paul.... he is as anti-Israel as it gets. I'd take Palin over Paul.
26
Dec 14, 2011 at 07:18 PM clear-thinker Says:Report as Inappropriate
“ Why are you attacking me? I don't support Ron Paul.... he is as anti-Israel as it gets. I'd take Palin over Paul. ”
Your original answer to Kevin was attacking Bachman. Since his #2 candidate was Ron Paul I thought you were agreeing with him. My apologies for my assumption.,