'Mischief' voters push Ron Paul to front of Iowa GOP Race

[LAGC]

Ron Paul is surging in the Republican presidential race. Just not among Republicans. The Texas congressman is leading some polls in Iowa and is in a tie for second in New Hampshire. Who are Ron Paul's supporters? Are they, in fact, Republicans? In an analysis accompanying his most recent survey in Iowa, pollster Scott Rasmussen noted, "Romney leads, with Gingrich in second, among those who consider themselves Republicans. Paul has a wide lead among non-Republicans who are likely to participate in the caucus." The same is true in New Hampshire. A poll released Monday by the Boston Globe and the University of New Hampshire shows Paul leading among Democrats and independents who plan to vote in the January 10 primary. But among Republicans, Paul is a distant third –– 33 points behind leader Mitt Romney.

In South Carolina, "Paul's support is higher among those who usually don't vote in GOP primary elections," notes David Woodard, who runs the Palmetto Poll at Clemson University. In a hotly-contested Republican race, it appears that only about half of Paul's supporters are Republicans. In Iowa, according to Rasmussen, just 51 percent of Paul supporters consider themselves Republicans. In New Hampshire, the number is 56 percent, according to Andrew Smith, head of the University of New Hampshire poll.

So who is supporting Paul? In New Hampshire, Paul is the choice of just 13 percent of Republicans, according to the new poll, while he is the favorite of 36 percent of independents and 26 percent of Democrats who intend to vote in the primary. Paul leads in both non-Republican categories. Non-Republicans are sure to vote in all three early GOP contests. Iowa requires that caucus participants be registered Republicans, but anyone can show up on caucus night, register, and vote.

http://campaign2012.washingtonexamin...op-race/276751

HAHAHA! Democrats are crossing over and voting for Ron Paul in the primary just like I plan to do here when I attend the Idaho Republican Caucus in March.

It would be funny as hell if he ended up winning not just the Republican nomination, but beating Obama in November as well.

[Altarboy]

I remember Rush telling people to do this with Hillary vs Obama and it helped keep things interesting for a while.

[LAGC]

Our Republican Party here in Idaho just went to a "closed primary" system so that only registered Republicans can vote in the primary.

But that's not stopping many Democrats from registering as Republicans and crossing over and voting in the Republican primary, just to fuck with the neo-conservatives.

Something like 80% of all eligible voters here in Idaho are registered Republicans now, but they only get like 60% of the vote in most general elections, so clearly 20% of them aren't really Republicans at all.

Personally, I think its stupid how you have to choose one or the other. Why can't everyone vote in BOTH the Republican and Democratic primaries, for their favorite candidates from both parties? Pick the lesser of the evils in each one, so that you can then vote for the lesser of the evils again in the general election.

Having a more open election system would seem to be more fair.

[stinker]

Personally, I think its stupid how you have to choose one or the other. Why can't everyone vote in BOTH the Republican and Democratic primaries, for their favorite candidates from both parties? Pick the lesser of the evils in each one, so that you can then vote for the lesser of the evils again in the general election.

Having a more open election system would seem to be more fair.

Why should anyone be allowed to influence a primary election when they have absolutely no intention of voting for that person in a general election under any circumstances? Personally i think it should be made so that you have to be registered for a few years to be able to influence a primary and if it can be demonstrated that your general votes consistently contradict your primary votes you get your privelige revoked. Universal sufferage really is a bad idea.

[ltorlo64]

I have thought it slightly unfair and underhanded for the opposing party (say party 1) to take part in the primary election for the other party (party 2) so that a weaker candidate may be put against the candidate for party 1. Those who are a member of party 1 should be allowed to vote in the primary for those candidates running in party 1 only and the same for party 2. We all get a say in who is elected when the general election comes around. From my reading this is used much more by Democrats to ensure winnability over a Republican, but I didn't like it any better when Rush recommended it. It skews the outcome and does not ensure we get the choice of the best candidates. For all that, it is not against the rules. I think it just shows the character of people who would practice this and the quality of the candidates they support. They couldn't win in a fair election so they have to influence the outcome some other way, whether like this or by registering people who are dead or don't exist, or by voting more than once.

[FunkyPertwee]

Fuck you LAGC.

I'm a Republican in spirit and a Ron Paul fan in reality, and you ruin the image of both. I hope you burn in Hell you fuckin shit stain.