Ben Carson Edging Close to Front-Runner Trump in Latest Iowa Poll

[NavyCanDo]

One more great debate performance by Dr. Ben Carson, and this cap can close to within the margin of error real fast. 

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-08-29/ben-carson-edging-close-to-front-runner-trump-in-latest-iowa-poll

[jmyrlefuller]

Best possible solution.

Carson isn't going to win either, but if he unseats Trump atop the polls, it could sap Trump's campaign of its prime asset (attention) and send it into a death spiral.

[DCPatriot]

Best possible solution.

Carson isn't going to win either, but if he unseats Trump atop the polls, it could sap Trump's campaign of its prime asset (attention) and send it into a death spiral.

"If"...will never happen.   Goes against the laws of physics. 

Have you noticed that Ben Carson will NOT criticize Donald Trump to any degree?  Neither does Cruz.

They're the GOP's Three Amigos.  Or, 'Holy Trinity', to some I would imagine.   

[NavyCanDo]

"If"...will never happen.   Goes against the laws of physics. 

 

Question for you.   Who was ahead in the Iowa polls in August 2011 the same distance out from the election we are now?   As you say the laws of physics say Romney winning the Nomination was an impossibility.    So if you are counting Carson, or any of the other candidates out this early, you really don't know as much about elections as you think.

[bkepley]

Question for you.   Who was ahead in the Iowa polls in August 2011 the same distance out from the election we are now?   As you say the laws of physics say Romney winning the Nomination was an impossibility.    So if you are counting Carson, or any of the other candidates out this early, you really don't know as much about elections as you think.

I would count him out but not for VP although he would be a controversial choice.  Trump might as well choose him since Trump has no experience either.  In fact for Trump it would make perfect sense.

[NavyCanDo]

Point I'm making is the Iowa Polls or even national polls this early mean very little. We only have one debate behind us, out of many, and a very long  campaign cycle ahead of us. For anyone to say "sorry losers, if your candidate  is not Trump your odds of winning Iowa is beyond the laws of physics", does not pay close attention to politics, or has a very short memory. Carson, Fiorina, Rubio, Cruz, Bush, among others have a good chance of being the winner in Iowa or be the eventual nominated candidate - and that can be backed up by history. The laws of physics at this point still say to ignore the polls, because the nomination is anyone's prize  for the taking.

[Free Vulcan]

Point I'm making is the Iowa Polls or even national polls this early mean very little. We only have one debate behind us, out of many, and a very long  campaign cycle ahead of us. For anyone to say "sorry losers, if your candidate  is not Trump your odds of winning Iowa is beyond the laws of physics", does not pay close attention to politics, or has a very short memory. Carson, Fiorina, Rubio, Cruz, Bush, among others have a good chance of being the winner in Iowa or be the eventual nominated candidate - and that can be backed up by history. The laws of physics at this point still say to ignore the polls, because the nomination is anyone's prize  for the taking.

Absolutely true. Remember how shifty things were the last time till it settled on Santorum. Iowa is near equal parts of socon, libertarian, and tea party conservative with a sizeable but smaller representation of moderate GOP voters in the urban areas. Iowans are looking for both a winner and someone who will express and hold to their ideals. As you implied, as the news, events and debates roll out, things will shift depending on the fallout, especially with this many good candidates to pick from. Fiorina and Carson are good examples of how things can change rapidly depending on what that candidate does to distinguish themselvves.

Also remember that Iowa doesn't pick the nominee. What they really do is weed out the wannabes. Anyone who can finish strong in the top 5 and especially top 3 will be sitting good for moving on the NH and SC. For those that don't it will be gut check time.

[Carling]

The most interesting part of the poll is that Trump's favorability rating in Iowa has gone from 35% in May to 61% now.  If this trend continues in other states, he's the nominee.

[NavyCanDo]

The most interesting part of the poll is that Trump's favorability rating in Iowa has gone from 35% in May to 61% now.  If this trend continues in other states, he's the nominee.

Favorability  ratings are far different than asking who in this list of candidates do you most support, and in that list there is a 7 point spread between Carson and Trump, and 10 between Trump and Walker per realclearpolitics. 

You have to understand how favorability ratings work.
Gallup ask the favorability question this way:
Donald Trump    • Favorable  • Unfavorable  • Never heard of  • No opinion

So you can select Favorable on Trump, because you think the issues he brings to the table are good ones, but you are a solid supporter of another candidate.  I have heard countless people confess this on talk radio and on FOX, and why he has such a huge number in Fav polls.

[Carling]

Favorability  ratings are far different than asking who in this list of candidates do you most support, and in that list there is a 7 point spread between Carson and Trump, and 10 between Trump and Walker per realclearpolitics. 

You have to understand how favorability ratings work.
Gallup ask the favorability question this way:
Donald Trump    • Favorable  • Unfavorable  • Never heard of  • No opinion

So you can select Favorable on Trump, because you think the issues he brings to the table are good ones, but you are a solid supporter of another candidate.  I have heard countless people confess this on talk radio and on FOX, and why he has such a huge number in Fav polls.

I know how they work.  My post was intended for a specific poster who was going on and on about how low Trump's favorability was in past  GOP polling, which meant it was impossible for Trump to be the nominee because 65% of primary voters found him unfavorable.  His initials are LG, and I'd expect him to now agree that the Trump clownshow could actually win the nomination, based on his previous logic.

[jmyrlefuller]

I know how they work.  My post was intended for a specific poster who was going on and on about how low Trump's favorability was in past  GOP polling, which meant it was impossible for Trump to be the nominee because 65% of primary voters found him unfavorable.  His initials are LG, and I'd expect him to now agree that the Trump clownshow could actually win the nomination, based on his previous logic.

The question is, what's changed? Why have so many Republicans been won over?

[kevindavis007]

I believe in 2007 at this time McCain was down and out..

[bkepley]

The question is, what's changed? Why have so many Republicans been won over?

It's been going on for years.  Finally they have a demagogue to focus on who seems to be taken seriously.

[Carling]

The question is, what's changed? Why have so many Republicans been won over?

My opinion is that GOP voters are so used to milquetoast candidates who allow the media to set the narrative that the Carsons, Trumps, and Cruzes bring some fight and a breath of fresh air to many of us. I don't support Trump, but I'd vote for him if he's the nominee.  I suppose I view his style and tactics favorably, if not Trump himself.

[Carling]

It's been going on for years.  Finally they have a demagogue to focus on who seems to be taken seriously.

An unserious answer from an unserious poster.

[EdinVA]

I like Carson for lotsa reasons but he just does not strike me a tough enough to take on hillary/biden/who ever the run.
I would like to see him take the reign of the federal health stuff (VA/NIH/etc) and clean house.  Perfect guy for that.

[bkepley]

An unserious answer from an unserious poster.

I'm not a professional.  Just a concerned person but my opinions are important to me.

[sinkspur]

My opinion is that GOP voters are so used to milquetoast candidates who allow the media to set the narrative that the Carsons, Trumps, and Cruzes bring some fight and a breath of fresh air to many of us. I don't support Trump, but I'd vote for him if he's the nominee.  I suppose I view his style and tactics favorably, if not Trump himself.

You like his style and tactics?  Really?

He lies, never gives any facts, talks about himself, points to polls as proof of his viability (if polls turn against him, he's dead, by his criteria), and is now in favor of tax increases. 

Donald Trump is a Democrat, you just refuse to realize or recognize that. I will never vote for a Democrat, and I will never vote for Donald Trump for anything.

I refuse to be a sap.

[Scottftlc]

The question is, what's changed? Why have so many Republicans been won over?

They are largely being won over by Trump's brashness, lack of fear and willingness to attack.  It is his tactics, his method and his willingness to brashly take on the media and political correctness that is winning for him. It has nothing to do with his personality, temperament or position on issues.  Republicans are so used to be out-manuevered, outflanked and hammered essentially senseless by the socialist democrat movement that this is very appealing.  Trump appears unafraid...of the media, of any other candidate, of the elite in Washington, of the political party apparatus, of pretty much everything.

Republicans are used to candidates that are a part of "the system" and are much more interested in getting along to go along. Remember Bush at the end of his presidency when he desperately needed to fight? He acted like he wanted to retire while the Democrats ruthlessly destroyed him.  That is what Republicans are used to...letting the other side set and drive the agenda and letting the media define THEM.  Trump is nothing like that for all his flaws and faults.  He is like what Lincoln said about Grant under tremendous pressure to relieve the highly unsavory but successful general: "I can't do without him, he fights."

That is what has changed...as unsavory as you might think him, he fights.  And that is why he is winning.

[sinkspur]

They are largely being won over by Trump's brashness, lack of fear and willingness to attack.  It is his tactics, his method and his willingness to brashly take on the media and political correctness that is winning for him. It has nothing to do with his personality, temperament or position on issues.  Republicans are so used to be out-manuevered, outflanked and hammered essentially senseless by the socialist democrat movement that this is very appealing.  Trump appears unafraid...of the media, of any other candidate, of the elite in Washington, of the political party apparatus, of pretty much everything.

Republicans are used to candidates that are a part of "the system" and are much more interested in getting along to go along. Remember Bush at the end of his presidency when he desperately needed to fight? He acted like he wanted to retire while the Democrats ruthlessly destroyed him.  That is what Republicans are used to...letting the other side set and drive the agenda and letting the media define THEM.  Trump is nothing like that for all his flaws and faults.  He is like what Lincoln said about Grant under tremendous pressure to relieve the highly unsavory but successful general: "I can't do without him, he fights."

That is what has changed...as unsavory as you might think him, he fights.  And that is why he is winning.

So he's fighting for Democrat positions, except on immigration and 24% of Republicans are getting sucked in by his "fight"? 

75% of the GOP aren't fooled by this charlatan. He can't win if 75% of the party opposes him, and they do.

[Scottftlc]

You like his style and tactics?  Really?

He lies, never gives any facts, talks about himself, points to polls as proof of his viability (if polls turn against him, he's dead, by his criteria), and is now in favor of tax increases. 

Donald Trump is a Democrat, you just refuse to realize or recognize that. I will never vote for a Democrat, and I will never vote for Donald Trump for anything.

I refuse to be a sap.

You may be absolutely right about everything you say - I am not passing judgement on that - but a milquetoast, careful, safe, timid candidate will not win. If the Republicans put up a Jeb Bush or John Kasich they will lose, literally everyone, everywhere can see that even this far out.

[Carling]

You like his style and tactics?  Really?

He lies, never gives any facts, talks about himself, points to polls as proof of his viability (if polls turn against him, he's dead, by his criteria), and is now in favor of tax increases. 

Donald Trump is a Democrat, you just refuse to realize or recognize that. I will never vote for a Democrat, and I will never vote for Donald Trump for anything.

I refuse to be a sap.

Please stop telling me what I think.  It's been happening a lot on this board toward anyone who isn't rabidly opposed to the Trump Clownshow.  I don't call you names or assume what you think, and I would like it reciprocated.  This place is turning as ugly as TOS.  I joined here to get away from ad hominem arguments.

I am favorable toward Trump's abrasive style, and I love his tactic of completely calling out the liberal media.  That said, nowhere have I posted that I'm a supporter of him in the primaries, and in my post you quoted, I stated I don't view him as a person favorably.

[Scottftlc]

75% of the GOP aren't fooled by this charlatan. He can't win if 75% of the party opposes him, and they do.

75% of GOP voters are not insider, "high information" voters...like Democrats they vote in national elections on feel...so on this point I think you are very, very wrong.

[sinkspur]

You may be absolutely right about everything you say - I am not passing judgement on that - but a milquetoast, careful, safe, timid candidate will not win. If the Republicans put up a Jeb Bush or John Kasich they will lose, literally everyone, everywhere can see that even this far out.

So you think it's got to be Trump or Cruz, both of whom would lose Hispanics and women in major numbers.

I think any Republican can capitalize on the prevarications and dishonesty of Hillary Clinton, as she will be the nominee.  She is fatally flawed and will lose independents in massive numbers.

[Carling]

75% of GOP voters are not insider, "high information" voters...like Democrats they vote in national elections on feel...so on this point I think you are very, very wrong.

My entire point was that 61% of Iowan GOP members now view Trump favorably.  If that trend continues in other states, then sinkspur's apparently made up number of 75% of primary voters not ever voting for Trump is even more suspect.