Poll: Ron Paul Surges in Iowa as Gingrich Implodes

The latest PPP polling from Iowa:

RpaulNewt Gingrich's campaign is rapidly imploding, and Ron Paul has now taken the lead in Iowa.  He's at 23% to 20% for Mitt Romney, 14% for Gingrich, 10% each for Rick Santorum, Michele Bachmann, and Rick Perry, 4% for Jon Huntsman, and 2% for Gary Johnson.

Gingrich has now seen a big drop in his Iowa standing two weeks in a row.  His share of the vote has gone from 27% to 22% to 14%.  And there's been a large drop in his personal favorability numbers as well from +31 (62/31) to +12 (52/40) to now -1 (46/47). Negative ads over the last few weeks have really chipped away at Gingrich's image as being a strong conservative- now only 36% of voters believe that he has 'strong principles,' while 43% think he does not.

Paul's ascendancy is a sign that perhaps campaigns do matter at least a little, in a year where there has been a lot of discussion about whether they still do in Iowa.  22% of voters think he's run the best campaign in the state compared to only 8% for Gingrich and 5% for Romney. The only other candidate to hit double digits on that question is Bachmann at 19%. Paul also leads Romney 26-5 (with Gingrich at 13%) with the 22% of voters who say it's 'very important' that a candidate spends a lot of time in Iowa.  Finally Paul leads Romney 29-19 among the 26% of likely voters who have seen one of the candidates in person.

Comments

  1. Sarina says

    It’s scary that Rick Santorum is at 4th place. Honestly, this guy only talks about how gay marriage is a threat to mankind and he’s more popular than Jon Huntsman in the race? Scary.

  2. Lance says

    This is exciting. It’s hard to accept all of Paul’s stances but he’s the only guy that isn’t a pawn for the political and corporate establishment. Obama was extension of Bush, Gingrich and Romney will be an extension of Obama. Simple puppets. I really think Paul will buck all of that. Idk, we need an upheaval and I trust him.

  3. RyanInSacto says

    Ask notable 2008 Iowa Caucus winner Mike Huckabee how it felt to go on to win the Republican nomination for President. Oh, wait… you can’t ask that because he didn’t become the nominee.

    I only say this to point out that it isn’t clear that winning in Iowa necessarily results in winning anything. The reason is that the Iowa Republican electorate is not necessarily representative of the national Republican electorate. That said, I guess if Ron Paul wins, he can at least look forward to having his own show on Fox News. Arguably, he would have more influence on policy by working at Fox than he would working at the White House anyway!

  4. Gregoire says

    I love how people cherrypick Ron Paul beliefs to form their opinion. He is mostly a nutcase, and his foreign policy beliefs alone would destroy the country.

    Need I remind you he’s the choice of the non-religious Tea Partiers?

  5. RyanInSacto says

    Like clockwork, Andy posts something about Ron Paul and BRIANINLA shows up to post a comment about the awesomeness of Ron Paul. “Ron Paul is the anti-bullying candidate who stands for peace, and people are starting to recognize that.” He will also leave your dishes virtually spotless. Elect him president and you’ll be able to eat anything you want, but still get the beach body you always desired. Herbal Ron Paul will give you long-lasting erections without a costly prescription. Also, just one dose of Ron Paul will remove those unsightly varicose veins that have been causing you such embarrassment. And that’s not all – you’ll have a year-round tan without messy lotions and sprays or dangerous UV light. All of this while respecting states rights and returning us to the gold standard. Act now while supplies last!

  6. Thomasina says

    I agree with Gregoire; more specifically, where are some commenters here getting the idea that Paul is pro-gay rights? Maybe he doesn’t demonize gay people *quite* as much as most of the other Republican candidates, but that’s pretty faint praise. He supported and still supports the “Defense of Marriage Act,” and has criticized Obama’s instruction to the Justice Department to stop defending it. He claims that his Libertarian views dictate that government should stay out of marriage altogether (even though he is fine with government intrusion into a lot of other things, like abortion), but the abolition of civil marriage would leave marriage an entirely religious institution, and that could leave marriage off-limits not only to gay couples but a whole lot of even slightly “non-traditional” straight couples (for instance, interfaith or interracial couples).

  7. Charlie says

    Ron Paul is just the latest in a string of ‘anybody but Romney’ candidates. After Paul, Santorum is the only one left. They desperately want an electable candidate and even the evangelicals in Iowa know Sandtorum doesn’t have a chance. He lost his last elective office by 20 points, and he was the incumbent. Perhaps they will bring in some more candidates after Iowa. There is still Sarah Palin and Jeb Bush.

  8. says

    Ron Paul’s position on marriage is that marriage licenses should not be required and that you and your spouse should just create and sign your own marriage contract. That would allow your marriage to fit your needs and other people’s marriage to fit their needs. It is a side-step in reality, but fits in well with his mostly libertarian beliefs.

    Ron Paul was for DADT before some of his constituents sat him down and explained to him the reality of the situation. He changed his mind on DADT and was one of only five Republicans who voted for its repeal. His statements on DOMA show that he does not understand the realities of the law and what exactly is being challenged.

    Ron Paul is indifferent to gay rights, not against them. That may be the same thing to you, but he has bigger fish to fry in his mind. He is almost singularly focused on the economy and that is one of the reasons that he is doing so well this year. This year is about the economy and jobs, not social issues.

    Paul certainly isn’t perfect, but I’d prefer a Republican Party made up of Ron Pauls vs Newt Gingriches.

  9. ChrisMe says

    It’s funny to see people bash Ron Paul’s stance on marriage but still support Obama.

    And as for calling him a nutcase for his foreign policy??

    He is pro-peace and diplomacy and get’s more support from MILITARY Personnel than ANY OTHER candidate or politician in the USA.

    Please. Ron Paul is NO kook.

  10. says

    @Thomasina – There ARE churches that will marry same-sex couples. And if there weren’t then you could start one. All religions are made-up nonsense, so make up some nonsense for your gay church.

    You don’t need a government license to have a religion (but you do get a tax exemption).

  11. says

    Here we go again with Ron Paul. It doesn’t matter if he wins IA (I’m all for it among those Republican nutcases), he won’t be the nominee and he won’t be President.

    The myth that Ron Paul is good for gay people needs to be put to rest once and for all. He isn’t. He’s a hypocrite on marriage. If he believes the federal government should be out of marriage, he should first take it out of his own 50+ year marriage, return all the benefits the federal government has bestowed on that marriage, then put forth a concrete policy that will sever all federal government ties to heterosexual marriage. (Good luck with that, Ronnie.) He should also explain why he thinks gay citizens should accept having our relationships less recognized than his own, why he supports DOMA, which forces my state to treat married gay and married straight couples differently, and why he believes gay citizens should be prohibited from fighting for equality through the justice system and the US Constitution.

    Those gay people who support Paul need to be clear that they are supporting a candidate who believes that we are not worthy of his consideration at all.

  12. RyanInSacto says

    @Ernie: I agree.

    It’s time to recognize that *apathy* about lgbt rights is not the same as *support* for lgbt rights.

    Chances are, a Paul supporter will now come along and say “Ron Paul just thinks there are more important issues than lgbt rights” or “don’t you care about anything else besides gay rights?” Let me preempt such responses by saying that what I want is for Ron Paul supporters to be honest about his positions on LGBT issues. They actually aren’t the only important issues to me, but they rank highly for me and that’s probably the case for a lot of people who read “a site with gay tendencies” as Towleroad bills itself.

  13. ChrisMe says

    You two have some of your facts wrong.

    Wake up and look into Ron Paul. He DOES support gay people. And by the way…

    Remember that it was only just earlier this year that Obama stopped enforcing DOMA.

  14. Bryan says

    I jsut found this sight because of the Ron Paul lip reading video…which was hilarious. But I Just wanted to say, that I support individuals doing what they want. I in fact think it is none of my business or the governments business about who marrys who. Btw, look up the video of Ron Paul on Jay Leno…pretty funny also

  15. says

    As a gay male, I can only say Paul is the ONLY GOP candidate that I like. His views on gay rights are a bit laissez faire and are quite independent, which I respect.

    Truthfully, I believe our economy and other issues to get our nation back on its feet is much more important than my rights and who I want to marry when I get older.

    Dr. Paul is essentially breaking down the wall between the two parties and is satiating both wants/needs of the parties-which is good.

  16. jack says

    Gingrich is just a dislikable man. Remember he is the guy who told one wife he wanted a divorce when she was fighting cancer; he told another after she was diagnosed with a serious disease. His present wife is the adulterous woman he was f ucking when he was leading the charge to impeach Clinton for his extra-marital affair. Oh how i love these family values republicans.

  17. says

    @Ernie,

    I truly believe that if you sat Representative Paul down and had that frank discussion. You might be surprised at the outcome. For a 76 year old, 30 year Congressional House Member of the GOP from a rural district, his Gay Rights record is frankly outstanding. Not from an absolute standard of course.

    That isn’t to say that he should receive a pass. No person deserves a pass on the implementation on our equal rights before the law. Obama does not deserve a pass. Hillary Clinton does not deserve a pass. Ron Paul does not deserve a pass. Gary Johnson does not deserve a pass. John Huntsman does not deserve a pass. No one political, or non-political, deserves a pass. All of them should be challenged.

    I have recently been recollecting my thoughts on the issue of tolerance with regards to gay rights. I frankly fail to see how anyone with any knowledge, with regard to which certain rights are defended in society and those certain rights which are not openly defended in society, can say that those who advocate for the equality of LGBT persons are not among the strictest advocates of tolerance.

    Tolerance does not mean that one defends the position of another. Tolerance only means that they will not use force, or the threat of force, to persuade others to their opinion. The anti-gay side constantly implores the use of force against the side of equality, while those of us who would defend the equal rights of all are often referred to quite mistakenly as “intolerant”.

    It is true that we the advocates of equality use our powers of persuasion, such as they are, to advocate a position of equality before the law for all. What we do not do is implore the powers that be to arrest and deter, by the force of law, anti-gay forces to be forcibly restrained.

    While we believe the anti-equality and anti-family forces to be mistaken in their deeply held beliefs, we recognize that they have the right to express their mistaken opinions regarding gay people, among others that they belittle in their emotionally harmful rhetoric. The anti-equality-before-the-law-right represents the worst traditions of America and they deserve to be outed for their transgressions against our culture and legal system.

  18. says

    Jay, your words are nice, but I’m not sure what the point is in this context. (Other than that they were easy to cut and paste in here.)

    Of course everyone has the right to express their mistaken opinions. No one is disputing that.

    It doesn’t change the fact that, while Ron Paul allegedly opposes federal governmental involvement in marriage, he has chosen to involve the federal government in his straight marriage for 54+ years. His choice. No one forced him to accept all the benefits and protections of a government marriage. Nor has he worked to sever heterosexual marriage from the government, yet he thinks gay couples should have no right (through the courts) to fight for the same opportunity he and all heterosexuals have.

    Meanwhile, gay citizens, unlike Ron Paul, do not have a choice whether to involve government in our marriages. That choice has been made for us. I understand Paul’s appeal to libertarians, but on social issues and on marriage equality, Paul fails and reveals himself to be a hypocrite.

    Sorry, that’s the way I see it.

  19. says

    “You two have some of your facts wrong.

    Wake up and look into Ron Paul. He DOES support gay people. And by the way…”

    Which facts do we have wrong? And if there is evidence that Ron Paul supports gay people, we haven’t seen it. Saying stuff, without backing it up, doesn’t make it true, Chrisme.

    We have looked into Ron Paul on civil rights. We don’t like what we see.

Leave A Reply