Rasmussen 2012 Political Survey
- Mitt Romney 44%
- Barack Obama 44%
- Barack Obama 42%
- Mitt Romney 34%
- Lou Dobbs 14%
- Barack Obama 46%
- Sarah Palin 43%
- Barack Obama 44%
- Sarah Palin 37%
- Lou Dobbs 12%
- Barack Obama 45%
- Mike Huckabee 41%
- Barack Obama 42%
- Mike Huckabee 36%
- Lou Dobbs 12%
Favorable / Unfavorable {Net}
- Mike Huckabee 58% / 30% {+28%}
- Mitt Romney 49% / 38% {+11%}
- Barack Obama 48% / 51% {-3%}
- Sarah Palin 46% / 49% {-3%}
- Lou Dobbs 33% / 42% {-9%}
Do you strongly approve, somewhat approve, somewhat disapprove or strongly disapprove of the job Barack Obama has been doing?
- Strongly approve 34%
- Somewhat approve 13%
- Somewhat disapprove 13%
- Strongly disapprove 39%
Survey of 800 likely voters was conducted November 24. The margin of error is +/- 3.5 percentage points.
November 25th, 2009 at 11:56 am
Go Sarah
November 25th, 2009 at 12:09 pm
Looks like Lou Dobbs could be 2012’s Ross Perot, handing victory to the Dems. That is, unless Lou surges and Mitt, Huck and Sarah play the Perot role.
November 25th, 2009 at 12:09 pm
Finally A poll that will matter to Rombots. I bet this one clearly shows that Mitt is the only one who can win.
This poll will be quoted and cited over and over again.
November 25th, 2009 at 12:14 pm
…and now without reason. HOWEVER, the value of this poll is that it completely does away with any importance people have assigned to favorability ratings as an indication of polling strength.
Lots of people like Huckabee, because he’s funny and a good TV host – that doesn’t mean they want him in hte Oval Office.
November 25th, 2009 at 12:18 pm
Well, I must congradulate Mr. Romney for being the only person to tie Mr. Obama in a two way contest and congradulate my other arch-rival for being the only one to get over 50% approval. However, I am not ashamed with Mrs. Palin’s decent numbers. I do not understand what the fasicination with Mr. Dobbs is about, but it is interesting that he hurts Mr. Romney a bit more than the other two.
November 25th, 2009 at 12:18 pm
It’s clear that Dobbs according to these numbers syphens more votes from Romney than the others. Romney is still tied with Obama without Dobbs, the others follow. I guess these 800 voters, haven’t been watching Huck’s weekend show or the Palin Love Fest on Fox over the past 2 weeks.
ROMNEY / DeMINT!
November 25th, 2009 at 12:22 pm
“I guess these 800 voters, haven’t been watching Huck’s weekend show or the Palin Love Fest on Fox over the past 2 weeks.” Maybe they have. They both keep Mr. Obama under the majic 50% with or without Mr. Dobbs in the mix.
November 25th, 2009 at 12:30 pm
Of course, its the only one that has meaning
))
Actually, what really counts are the early states and how they will vote in the primary, and with the Ohio plan that the Republicans have adopted, Romney has big edge, followed by Huckabee.
November 25th, 2009 at 12:31 pm
#3,
I’m posted the results on 5 sites so far with THIS site as reference. The results are so much clearer here than at Rassmussen—;-)
November 25th, 2009 at 12:33 pm
Independents showing some love for Mitt. Hard to believe Lou Dobbs is getting 12% in a three way matchup.
November 25th, 2009 at 12:35 pm
As far as Lou Dobbs is concerned, he is not an issue, unlike Ross Perot, he doesn’t have what it takes to make a run.
#1: He doesn’t have the money.
#2: George Bush Senior is not running (many conservatives where not happen with him when he was
running for re-election. There was a recession and in Gulf War I, we didn’t finish of Sadam, even though we where within eye site of Bagdad).
November 25th, 2009 at 12:35 pm
“WSU Says:
November 25th, 2009 at 12:14 pm
…and now without reason. HOWEVER, the value of this poll is that it completely does away with any importance people have assigned to favorability ratings as an indication of polling strength.
Lots of people like Huckabee, because he’s funny and a good TV host – that doesn’t mean they want him in hte Oval Office.”
You got it, WSU — you put your finger right on the pulse of reality. For the first time in the annals of history, having a +28 favorability doesn’t mean a thing — although it does put you within 4 points of winning the White House. And having a -3 negativity puts you three points away from winning the White House. And a +11 points ties you all up.
And if you go into the crosstabs, the reality gets even better. In 18-25 category, Romney is doing better than Palin or Huckabee. Romney does best in the low incomes (better than Huck and Palin) and, as the income rises, Obama does the best. And in evangelicals, of the 63% who would vote for Palin against Obama, only 60% would vote for Huckabee against Obama. And Lou Dobbs, a total unknown in the world of politics, reverses the effect for everybody.
What do I take away from this poll? Firstly, everyone is within the MOE of beating Obama; secondly, the lower income traditionally goes democrat while the higher income traditionally goes republican, but, in a poll where Obama is doing so poorly against his competitors, traditions are being turned on their head — lower income rushing into Romney, high income pouring out for Obama. Thirdly, despite WSU’s words of wisdom, I take traditional importance, in this early stage, on favorability, which is as follows: +28, +11, -3.
Of this I can assure you, Lou Dobbs will not be a factor; and, if Palin remain in negative territory, she will not be either.
November 25th, 2009 at 12:36 pm
I think the real story is PALIN BOOK TOUR HAVING AN IMPACT.
Obama 46
Palin 43
with less then 3 years left proves palin is very viable in 2012
November 25th, 2009 at 12:42 pm
Both Huckabee and Palin got a bump from their books, so you should expect Romney to get one also (maybe not as much as Palin).
http://www.politicsdaily.com/2009/08/06/mitt-romney-writing-political-book-launch-of-presidential-bid/
November 25th, 2009 at 12:44 pm
“There was a recession” and we are not in one now?
“if Palin remain in negative territory, she will not be either.” The little word if. Few people have finished her book yet and she has yet to visit many American cities and she is already almost into positive territorry. I agree that at the present time the internal (cross-tabs) look good for Mr. Huckabee, but Mrs. Palin is just getting started, she is far from out yet!
November 25th, 2009 at 12:45 pm
Yes, but back then the Republican was President, now it a Democrat. A complete reverse of things.
November 25th, 2009 at 12:51 pm
Palin is going to give Huck some headaches. She’s far from over, as some people mistakenly believe.
November 25th, 2009 at 12:55 pm
You are correct Thunder that the landscape is different in this recession because the party in power has changed, but the mood is still similar.
Haha, I see you reading the book Martha. Yes, Mrs. Palin will give Mr. Huckabee a headache, but she will give many others headaches as well.
November 25th, 2009 at 1:02 pm
Ohio Joe, I agree with you, the relevant word here for Palin is “if.” I do believe her favorabilities will increase with her book tour — and especially with the massive media attention — for how long and to what extent I am not sure — that is an incredibly important question.
Cross-tabs are lopsided for everyone in this poll (the young crowd wants Romney over Obama — the poor are rushing to Romney and the rich are clinging to Obama — and the same evangelicals who will vote for Palin over Obama will choose Obama over Huckabee), and the Dobb effect is extremely overated. Dobbs is just an effect of the moment. I am not sure what this poll tells us then –except that all three are well within the MOE (which may speak more poorly for Obama than anything else) and favorabilities are positive for Huck and Romney and slightly negative for Palin.
November 25th, 2009 at 1:03 pm
Where is she going to get the money to run a campaign. At least Huckabee has his evangelicals.
After Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, and South Carolina, I don’t see any candidates surviving except for Romney and Huckabee (They may very well split to first 4 contests).
November 25th, 2009 at 1:05 pm
“Where is she going to get the money to run a campaign.” With respect, how freaking stingy do you think we Palinites are?
November 25th, 2009 at 1:06 pm
Let’s agree at this point in the proceedings to dispense with the claim that Mitt, Huck or Sarah is UNELECTABLE.
By this poll they are all electable and Obama is possibly not.
I see Dobbs as a wild card or red herring.
The more important numbers are the head to head matchups without Dobbs IMHO.
November 25th, 2009 at 1:09 pm
Because we are running against an incumbent in ‘12, Huck’s folksy optimism might not sell as well as powerful criticism. Romney and Palin both excel at delivering stinging criticism. The GOP will be after red meat in ‘12 and I think Palin and Romney are more poised to deliver it than Huck.
November 25th, 2009 at 1:13 pm
What I want to see is what impact would an daily onslaught of vitriol, disinformation and propaganda over a 90 day period by the Obama war room and the MSM towards Mitt or Huck would do to their poll numbers.
November 25th, 2009 at 1:14 pm
“Thunder wrote: … Actually, what really counts are the early states and how they will vote in the primary, and with the Ohio plan that the Republicans have adopted, Romney has big edge, followed by Huckabee.”
Thunder, you have mentioned the Ohio Plan several times. The Ohio Plan is still very much in a flux — and, to the extent it is finalized, has absolutely no certainties at this point. Basically, it is a plan that would allow, by a system of pods and lotteries, for the smaller states to vote first, then the middle states and lastly the larger states. As I say, the states are divided into three pods — at the moment — it is all very much in a flux — and the states within the pods would be rotated every four years and chosen by lottery. Thus, there would be no way to know at this time, what states within the pods would be pulled for lottery for 2012. The various samples are enormous. There is certainly no giveaway to Romney — or to Huckabee, for that matter — at this point under the Ohio Plan.
Two other things to remember: Under the Ohio Plan, three states — Iowa, New Hampshire and S.C. — reserve their first place — before the Ohio Plan kicks in, at least for 2012, after those three states. Secondly, since the first pod consists of smaller states, no matter which states end up in the first lottery, their results in no way would determine the nomination. That was the idea behind the Ohio Plan — to spread out the campaigning (which would provide more for retail politics — a factor all candidates cherish) and to give the smaller states a chance to matter before the other states kick in.
November 25th, 2009 at 1:17 pm
This showes Romney shuld be king.
November 25th, 2009 at 1:19 pm
They obviously didn’t poll on Pawlenty because they fear him.
November 25th, 2009 at 1:20 pm
“What I want to see is what impact would an daily onslaught of vitriol, disinformation and propaganda over a 90 day period by the Obama war room and the MSM towards Mitt or Huck would do to their poll numbers.” Great point!
While I doubt that Mr. Dobbs will run, it is not totally nutty to poll third characters because it is not out of the question to have a few third and forth character who can win a few per cent each in a general election.
Voters: Good point about the Ohio plan which may or may not even happen.
November 25th, 2009 at 1:22 pm
“They obviously didn’t poll on Pawlenty because they fear him.” Haha, who knows, I do not fear him per se, but I would certainly back him if my first choice is out of the picture.
November 25th, 2009 at 1:24 pm
“Bob wrote: What I want to see is what impact would an daily onslaught of vitriol, disinformation and propaganda over a 90 day period by the Obama war room and the MSM towards Mitt or Huck would do to their poll numbers.”
A lot of damage, Bob. That is why early polls as far as numbers go tell us nothing, because we are NOT in campaign mode. Obama is consumed with his presidential concerns — he is not campaigning (although he is accused of it, we ain’t seen nothing yet — wait ’til 2011).
The truth is, as we near 2009, Obama is vulnerable — yes — but since we are not in campaign mode, we don’t really know how the public could be swayed. More importantly, we have no idea where Obama will be in 2011, although I am sure we all have opinions.
If the economy is doing well, it is all over for any of our candidates. If it is sputtering, then each candidate has a shot. That is why the net favorability/non-favorability ratio is where I put my greatest emphasis at this early stage — and not because my candidate is +28 (although I will admit it moves me in that direction), but, seriously, because it is the factor that is not dependent on economical and momentary trends.
November 25th, 2009 at 1:28 pm
None of the big three is a lock and neither is Obama.
The definition of the word competitive.
Compare it to AFC division in the NFL. There are 4-5 teams with a legitimate shot to represent the AFC in the SB: the Colts, Steelers, Patriots, Chargers, and Bengals
We’ll see over the next 24 months how it will unfold.
Of course everything may be academic if the Messiah shoots up to mid 50’s favorabilities again.
By the way did anyone catch the other Rasmussen poll today where only 19% of white voters strongly approve now of Obama’s job performance and 61% of whites disapprove overall of it. He won’t reach even 50% soon with those numbers in the Rasmussen poll.
November 25th, 2009 at 1:31 pm
All within the margin of error. At this point it doesn’t look like voters distinguish much between Huck, Palin or Romney.
They’re largely treating them as ‘generic Republican’.
Too bad this is coming out in late 2009 and not early 2012.
November 25th, 2009 at 1:34 pm
Looks like the Big Three could win in 2012, but get ready for the attacks on Conservatism, Mormonism, Evangelicalism, and Palinism.
November 25th, 2009 at 1:34 pm
Romney loses the most support to Dobbs because Dobbs is a populist and Romney’s weakest with the leaning-Republican populist types.
November 25th, 2009 at 1:40 pm
#33:
Whoever is the GOP nominee that goes with the territory.
I think the key to 2012 is can the GOP nominee raise $1B to match Obama’s fundraising, can the GOP equal the high-tech apparatus of the Democrats, and can the GOP galvanize the base where millions volunteer to GOTV?
November 25th, 2009 at 1:40 pm
It’s all about how the economy is going into 2012 and which of our top three candidates will wait till 2016.
One question. Who would waste their hard earned money and vote on Dobbs thereby handing the election to Obama on a silver plate?
November 25th, 2009 at 1:40 pm
“Doug forrester says:
They’re largely treating them as ‘generic Republican’.”
Yes, absolutely, that is the gist of it. Putting aside the somewhat screwy internal crosstabs, I think that summarizes best what this poll reflects. The one who should be most worried is Obama. The poll reflects that, at this point in time, no matter who you put against him, he is not polling greatly.
But as you said, this is late 2009, not 2011.
November 25th, 2009 at 1:44 pm
Dobbs. I can’t stand that guy. Who the H does he think he is, anyway?
My Gosh, I can’t imagine anyone supporting him. I must really be out of touch.
November 25th, 2009 at 1:46 pm
If you look at all the polls over the last months, it is really maily the PPP democratic poll that always shows Romney in the worst position. His polling numbers in actual match-ups have generally been pretty good.
And while Huckabee always does well in “favorability” numbers–I would be careful had much importance I put on “favorability” as opposed to who wins a head to head matchup–regardless of whether talking primary or general election.
Bottom line is that there has never been much difference between Huckabee and Romney in the numbers. The interesting thing will be to see if Palin can improve her numbers. Don’t expect to see much change in the Huckabee/Romney numbers until the primary begins (and then, of course, it is about individual states–not national polling numbers).
November 25th, 2009 at 1:47 pm
#3 “This poll will be quoted and cited over and over again.”
I hardly doubt it(Mitt was ahead in virtually every poll for the first half of the year, so why would this poll be ‘the big one’?) but it does show that people have a consistent opinion of Mitt.
So much for the “it was a MA health care that did him in” talk.
November 25th, 2009 at 1:48 pm
Of course, the Obamanuts will overreact at this poll and go after poor Mitt now perceived as a big threat. How dare he tie the great Barack. Here it comes, Romney!
November 25th, 2009 at 1:49 pm
Then why is her pack doing so poorly? Do you guys all wait until just before 2012? There are restrictions on how much you can raise from individuals (each person) each year.
November 25th, 2009 at 1:49 pm
These numbers don’t look good for Romney in a primary. This poll suggests that Palin is electable and that was one of the things that Romney would likely raise in a hypothetical contest. I suspect that Republicans would probably vote for who they like the most as long as that person is electable.
Favorables among Republicans
Romney: 63/23
Huckabee: 80/14
Palin: 81/15
Very Favorables among Republicans
Romney: 17%
Huckabee: 40%
Palin: 51%
November 25th, 2009 at 1:50 pm
#5
“but it is interesting that he hurts Mr. Romney a bit more than the other two.”
I don’t think it is a mystery. Romney appeals to independents who want “can do” skills. Lou Dobbs probably siphons away some indies and more conservative Dems from Romney.
November 25th, 2009 at 1:51 pm
pollster.com also came out today with Obama’s average F/UF with independent voters: 43.8/45.0
Obama has been losing indie voters in droves. According to Rasmussen his F with indies is now only 33 and according to Fox it is 34. And according to the Gallup weekly evaluation of its daily tracking poll of ‘pure independents’ it is 38.
November 25th, 2009 at 1:51 pm
These numbers are or should be encouraging for the Big Three, and for those who want to enter the race. The way things are going, we can beat Obama in 2012. All it will take is a united GOP with a postive message about where we will take the country. As for who should lead us, we’ll just have to wait until the primaries to decide that.
November 25th, 2009 at 1:51 pm
Since 2012 is so far away I think there are 2 important things we get from this poll.
First, Palin is at least on her way to rehabing her image but the only way to really make that happen will be to talk policy in an adversarial setting and sound intelligent and competent. That likely won’t happen until the primaries really start in 2011.
Second, the GOP is very vulnerable to Dobbs-like 3rd party challengers in 2010 who could swing the election to Dems.
November 25th, 2009 at 1:52 pm
By the way, what would Romney’s numbers against Obama be without Dobbs in the mix??
November 25th, 2009 at 1:52 pm
When do we get year in review posts about the candidates? Report cards? This one on Romney was interesting to view Mitt’s strategic moves over the past year. http://www.gop12.com/2009/11/mitt-romneys-2009.html
November 25th, 2009 at 1:54 pm
CC,
Actually, Dobbs wins the same percentage of indies against Palin, Romney, and Huckabee.
Where Romney is hurt the most is he goes from winning 77% of Republicans against Obama to 62% with Dobbs in the mix.
Palin goes from 79% to 68% while Huckabee goes from 77% to 67%.
November 25th, 2009 at 1:54 pm
#43,
I agree as a Romney guy that having better favorables among the GOP would be good, but as I just wrote, all Palin has done is show she will be given a second chance to reshape her image. She still needs to go out and prove the first impression wrong by talking policy in a touch environment and come across as intelligent, well-informed and competent, not just as “one of us”.
November 25th, 2009 at 1:58 pm
Skinner,
Agreed about Palin. This is a great poll for all three against Obama but I just don’t think it looks good for Romney for the purposes of a primary.
Larry Sabato is pretty much pimping Lou Dobbs as a third-party candidate. He’s buying the poll.
November 25th, 2009 at 1:59 pm
For what I have read, its all but a done deal.
http://shotsonthehouse.com/?p=1963
The second Group is very favoriable to Romney
November 25th, 2009 at 1:59 pm
Except for LD’s & BO’s numbers, the others look sorta suspiciously screwy…
Favorable / Unfavorable {Net}
Mike Huckabee 58% / 30% {+28%} ?
Mitt Romney 49% / 38% {+11%} ?
Barack Obama 48% / 51% {-3%}
Sarah Palin 46% / 49% {-3%} ?
Lou Dobbs 33% / 42% {-9%}
November 25th, 2009 at 1:59 pm
42 – how is her pac doing poorly? She raised what 700,000 in the first 6 months of this year except she didn’t start her pac until Feb…so she raised it in 5 months. doesn’t sound so poor to me.
November 25th, 2009 at 2:00 pm
Democracy Corp found similar results yesterday.
http://www.democracycorps.com/wp-content/files/dcor111609fq12.web_.pdf
Among voters
Barack Obama 47%
Mitt Romney 37%
Lou Dobbs 5%
Ralph Nader 4%
Among likely voters
Barack Obama 45%
Mitt Romney 38%
Lou Dobbs 6%
Nader 4%
November 25th, 2009 at 2:03 pm
#53:
I don’t see the big states adopting such a plan. Florida was one of the vital primaries last time, we want to be important again, and I’m sure the people in CA, NY, MO, GA and NJ feel that way as well. Plus, it isn’t up to the RNC to decide when each state holds it’s primary. Some have the state committee choose, others have the state legislature. How could the RNC enforce this plan upon the states, and isn’t it the states perogative anyways?
November 25th, 2009 at 2:03 pm
“Then why is her pack doing so poorly?” It is not doing all that poorly, while it is not on par with Mr. Romney’s, it is in better shape than HUCPAC.
November 25th, 2009 at 2:03 pm
Craig,
Both Huckabee and Romney poll over 30% favorables with liberals.
Palin is at 9% favorables with liberals and that accounts for the difference with Romney.
But high favorables with liberals are useless because Palin, Romney, and Huckabee all only win 4% of liberals against Obama.
November 25th, 2009 at 2:06 pm
53. “The second Group is very favoriable to Romney”
Each of the three candidates should get their fair share there.
The key, as just about always, is how to stop 1 of the 3 from grabbing up IOWA and SOUTH CAROLINA if the past is our guide. Also, doesn’t FLORIDA still come soon after SC?
November 25th, 2009 at 2:11 pm
58 – but you cannot even compare the two. The only comparison we have now is void because Romney’s PAC was in operation a month longer in that time period and not to mention he was already organized and new right where to go get some money.
November 25th, 2009 at 2:12 pm
57. I agree. Florida needs a huge say.
Face it, it’s a vital state for the Republicans to carry in 2012.
Needs to follow Iowa, New Hamp
and S Carolina asap. Should, imo.
November 25th, 2009 at 2:13 pm
True Jersey and shhhhhh, neither of the other two main camps has the backing of TEAM Sarah.
November 25th, 2009 at 2:18 pm
#62:
Absolutely. We are much more representative of the nation as a whole than IA, NH, NV, and SC. We have both major minority groups (African-Americans and Hispanics, Cubans and otherwise). There are Protestants, Catholics, even Jews. We have northeastern and midwestern transplants along with native Southerners. If a candidate can win Florida, it shows they can appeal to a very broad section of the electorate.
November 25th, 2009 at 2:18 pm
Why is it when everyone talks about the early primaries, they always leave out Nevada (which has more delegates than SC)?
November 25th, 2009 at 2:24 pm
#65:
Maybe it’s because it’s a caucus, but not the first one like IA? Last time no one really contested NV, and it was on the same day as the highly contested SC primary?
November 25th, 2009 at 2:24 pm
“Why is it when everyone talks about the early primaries, they always leave out Nevada (which has more delegates than SC)?” Because rightly or wrongly, SC is a little more important.
November 25th, 2009 at 3:06 pm
“craig Says:
November 25th, 2009 at 1:48 pm
Of course, the Obamanuts will overreact at this poll and go after poor Mitt now perceived as a big threat. How dare he tie the great Barack. Here it comes, Romney!”
I don’t agree. If this poll gets the liberals nervous, it will be all about Palin. As soon as they get even a scent that her electabilities are better, they will go crazy.
And I am not a big “the liberals fear Palin” proponent. I think they DID fear her in the first few weeks after McCain selected her; but thereafter the liberals did such a hack job on her — and, let’s face it, she didn’t really help herself with her interviews — they stopped worrying. With a deep net negative ratio, they assumed she was non-electable. Now, with this poll, you just watch their fear level rise up — and the hack jobs will begin again. Of course, her net ratio is still negative -3 — and that will give them some comfort — but I don’t think they will be taking any chances. You can just start counting — 3, 2, 1 — boom!!
November 25th, 2009 at 3:07 pm
I think this is exactly right. If the economy is sputtering who gets the nod as the one who people think can fix it?
November 25th, 2009 at 3:10 pm
Who really believes that the economy is going to be doing well in 2012?
Rush Limbaugh claims that Obama’s primary goal is to send the US economy and the entire capitalist system into the tank. I tend to believe him. By the way Rush announced today he is documented by the Sullivan group to be right 99.5% of the time. Anybody want to bet he is wrong just this once.
November 25th, 2009 at 3:15 pm
Haha, he slipped a bit from 99.7%.
November 25th, 2009 at 3:18 pm
69, If there’s a 3rd Party troublemaker like Dobbs (who’s goin’ to talk ECONOMY and about nothing else), no Republican can win.
November 25th, 2009 at 3:20 pm
Btw, Dobb’s or another thirder obviously can’t either.
November 25th, 2009 at 3:35 pm
http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/20126-rnc-poised-to-begin-altering-its-primary-calendar-for-2012
Thunder, the Ohio Plan has not been adopted by the national committee and is still very much up in the air. Much of the heavy lifting vis-a-vis agreement on reform in general will be done at the convention next summer. Read the article by the Hill — gives you a sense of where things are. I am quoting below significant parts of the article.
” ‘Now, for the first time ever, we both have the authority to make changes and can actually talk to each other and maybe hope to work things out,’ said David Norcross, New Jersey’s national committeeman and the Northeast’s representative to the GOP panel.
” ‘We’ve established some good, open dialogue previously with Jim Roosevelt,’ added Bob Bennett, the former Ohio GOP chairman who has made reforming the calendar his signature legacy. ‘It’s really necessary in this case to work with the Democrats to come up with a workable plan that will be accessible to the individual states.’
“ ‘We’re able to talk. We don’t always agree on things,’ Roosevelt, a member of the DNC’s Change Commission, which is also dedicated to reforming the primary calendar, told The Hill. ‘We’ve had ongoing conversations based on where the DNC and the Democratic Convention’s views stand.’
“The GOP’s committee will meet for the first time next Monday in Washington, though the real heavy lifting is expected to begin this summer at the Republican National Committee (RNC) meeting in San Diego. Their mandate: to spread out the primary process and avoid a national primary, all while earning enough support from committee members who want their states to go first.
“ ‘Our role is to review the timing, the process, the rules of the 2012 presidential calendar and either propose some changes or leave it as is,’ said former Michigan GOP Chairman Saul Anuzis, a member of the committee. ‘I think we do need to ultimately change the system. I think there’s been a tremendous amount of momentum to come up with some kind of reform.’
“Major thorns in the side of any reform prospect — concerns of early-contest states Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada — have already been accounted for; the four states that led off the 2008 primary process will do so again in 2012. But now, coalitions that have favored or opposed various plans will once again be mobilized to ensure their states’ voices are heard.
“The committee itself has never been of one mind on fixing the calendar. In 2008, Bennett offered what became known as the Ohio plan, which would have divided states into groups and rotated them between months in future presidential elections. Anuzis and others strongly opposed that idea, which ultimately died before reaching the national convention.”
November 25th, 2009 at 3:45 pm
#40
“(Mitt was ahead in virtually every poll for the first half of the year, so why would this poll be ‘the big one’?) but it does show that people have a consistent opinion of Mitt.”
A poll this far out is virtually meaningless. Comparing his standing to Palin’s is instructive, though. She has been pilloried mercilessly for over a year. Romney has been left to bask in relative obscurity. That would change if he were nominated, and even before. His negatives would inevitably go up, even if his adversaries had no ammunition whatsoever. As it is, they have his numberless flipflops, his health care debacle in Massachusetts, his basically elitist mien, and numerous other negatives which will drive his negatives through the roof.
What Romney can take away from this poll is the secure knowledge that, BEFORE there has been any campaign against him, Sarah Palin is MORE popular with Republicans, and thus far more likely to be nominated, and that she is just as electable as he is right now, BEFORE Obama and the DNC give him the same treatment that they have given her.
November 25th, 2009 at 3:58 pm
75. Sarabee, oh it’s comin’. Put on your helmet, Mittman.
November 25th, 2009 at 4:00 pm
76, Or just let Sarah and Mike protect you, quiet one!
November 25th, 2009 at 4:01 pm
Zebra
Do you think Fox will continue to run a full time ” Sarah ” channel for the next two years? Do you not believe a certain amount of positive Sarah poll impact is reflected in her full time media coverage right now? Do you also not see that Sarah draws votes from Huck, not Romney ? Romney has certainly not basked in relative obscurity. His one change of position, the Mass health care plan and his so-called “elitest” mien ( whatever the hell that means ) have had whatever negative effect they will have. His negatives are quite likely to come down, starting with real solutions in his Spring 2010 book.
So, dream on, my friend.
November 25th, 2009 at 4:16 pm
Bachmann to speak at National Tea Party event
GOP Rep. Michele Bachmann’s office has confirmed that Bachmann will speak at a National Tea Party event in February. Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin will also speak at the event. The National Tea Party Convention will be held in Tennessee on February 4,5 and 6th.
http://minnesota.publicradio.org/collections/special/columns/polinaut/archive/2009/11/bachmann_to_spe_2.shtml
Palin’s Unsettling Views
http://www.forward.com/articles/119650/
Homeowners say fight is not over
New York courts says land can be seized to build new Nets arena in Brooklyn
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=4685368
November 25th, 2009 at 4:22 pm
“What Romney can take away from this poll is the secure knowledge that, BEFORE there has been any campaign against him, Sarah Palin is MORE popular with Republicans, and thus far more likely to be nominated, and that she is just as electable as he is right now, BEFORE Obama and the DNC give him the same treatment that they have given her.”
Zebra, I am not a Romney supporter, but I don’t agree with your analysis.
Firsly, if this poll suggests that 43% would vote for Palin (as opposed to 46% that would vote for Obama), it also suggests that 49% would NOT vote for her (unless you want to argue that those who dislike her would vote for her nontheless). Adding up the votes between Obama and Palin get you to 89% of those polled, but based on her -3 negativity, she doesn’t have that much growing room. That does not rush to define the word “electable” anymore than it did with Hillary.
Secondly, once the campaign begins, in order to be competitive, Palin would need to be accessible to the entire media. She must open up her wings and fly beyond FOX and facebook. Campaigns against Palin notwithstanding, Palin has not gone through a primary and endured the privilege of being torn apart by your own party. They have all been bounced around.
As I say, I am not a Romney supporter. I think Palin’s negativies have improved — at least for now — but Romney is certainly respected across the board — and he has nothing to be disappointed about in this poll. And this is coming from a Huckabee supporter — (who by the way I think has the greatest opportunity for growth, for what it is worth).
November 25th, 2009 at 4:33 pm
This whole Obamacare-Romneycare connection by the voters is going to be at the very least a HUGE Romney problem in 2010 through 2012 imo.
His book cannot come out fast enough.
Clearly EXPLAIN yourself, Mitt. Or just say you’re sorry and it won’t ever ever ever happen again.
Then, do the same thing with your previous TARP support… etc. etc. etc
November 25th, 2009 at 4:35 pm
#76
“His one change of position”
Which one? Abortion? Sanctuary cities? Has he changed on socialized medicine or is that yet to come?
Sarah Palin does not need Fox to generate media coverage. Nor does she draw votes from Huck. Those are her voters. She is bringing new voters to the GOP, economic libertarians, in the same way Reagan did. Mitt has the stodgy, elitist establishment and that, my friend, is not enough in the face of the legions she is recruiting. Huckabee has his own baggage, a load of it, and he still bested Romney in nearly every contest in 2008, in spite of Romney’s huge financial advantage. Romney will enjoy no such financial advantage over Palin in 2012.
I had not heard about Romney’s 2010 book. I imagine there will be extremely long lines of people waiting to get him to autograph it. (Sarc.) Face it, people just don’t like him, a lot of people. The more they learned about him in 2008, the worse he did. And in 2008, he was facing Huck and McCain, vanilla politicians with nowhere near the sheer incandescence of Sarah Palin. Get ready for a wipeout.
November 25th, 2009 at 4:48 pm
Maybe all this poll shows is two things.
1. the thing on most people’s mind is how honked off they are at Obama. He seemed to keep the same support/opposition with or without Dobbs. Which goes a long way to explaining the similarity in the other three numbers. They are little more than protest votes, which is appropriate since if they still favor Obama the candidate running opposite is irrelevant.
2. All three candidates continue to run favorably with substantial portions of the party and have a plausible story to tell re: running in 2012. At this point it is hard to go past that point. As has been noted, who is voting where in early contests will be important.
Iowa may look very different in 2012. The presence of three candidates that are attractive to Evangelicals is enormous. In 2008, it was easy to focus energy around a single candidate vs. the three others. It did no violence to a congregation to suggest the need to be active and the natural beneficiary was fairly obvious. In 2012, there will be much less urgency as there will be at least three acceptable candidates on social issues and there could be much damage done in a congregation to try to focus it toward one candidate.
I also expect the economy to take a much more prominent role, all other things being lower profile. That issue will affect who comes out on a cold January evening and who stays home. And unless something drastic changes, it will be the only party in town. In 2008, independents rushed to the excitment of the Obama/Clinton UFC fight. 2012 could see many of those independents sit in on the GOP caucuses. And that’s just how unknowable IA is, let alone weverything that happens thereafter.
November 25th, 2009 at 4:58 pm
83. It will be extremely difficult for Sarah to bypass Mike in IOWA
if they BOTH run. I kinda think ONE will wait until ‘16.
Which one? Way to early to tell.
November 25th, 2009 at 5:00 pm
“too” early, that is. ; )
November 25th, 2009 at 5:01 pm
#80
“Firsly, if this poll suggests that 43% would vote for Palin (as opposed to 46% that would vote for Obama), it also suggests that 49% would NOT vote for her (unless you want to argue that those who dislike her would vote for her nontheless). Adding up the votes between Obama and Palin get you to 89% of those polled, but based on her -3 negativity, she doesn’t have that much growing room. That does not rush to define the word “electable” anymore than it did with Hillary.”
I preface my remarks with the disclaimer that polls taken this far out are essentially meaningless. But her standing, especially with the GOP voters who will decide the nominee , is nothing short of amazing given the vitriolic and coninuous attcks on her and the absence of ANY scrutiny of her rivals. Imagine a little scrutiny of Huckabee’s 1000 pardons, his tax hikes in Arkansas and his La Raza friendly immigration stands, and you can wonder where his number would head. That was my point.
As far as whether she can win, I refer you to this poll, from the New York Times (1/20/79) citin a Gallup poll from December 1978, only 2 years before the 1980 election:
Carter Easily Defeats Reagan
A Gallup Poll from Dec 1978 showed Carter with a huge 57-35 lead over Reagan. Up substantially from a 52-43 lead a few months earlier.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2391470/posts
“Secondly, once the campaign begins, in order to be competitive, Palin would need to be accessible to the entire media. She must open up her wings and fly beyond FOX and facebook.”Firsly, if this poll suggests that 43% would vote for Palin (as opposed to 46% that would vote for Obama), it also suggests that 49% would NOT vote for her (unless you want to argue that those who dislike her would vote for her nontheless). Adding up the votes between Obama and Palin get you to 89% of those polled, but based on her -3 negativity, she doesn’t have that much growing room. That does not rush to define the word “electable” anymore than it did with Hillary.”
Palin has been accessible to the media. She has given interviews to Oprah, Barbara Walters, numerous local outlets. Oh, you mean, she has to sit down with “serious” journalists like Katie whatshername, like Huckabee. With her croweds and success and given the trajectory of her polls, you will forgive me if I doubt that she needs your insights on how to thrive in the media fishbowl.
“In order to be competitive, she would need to be more accessible.”
Come again. She is already competitive. Can’t you see that? Not only that, she is the front runner. And not by a little. The 2012 GOP nomination is very quickly becoming hers for the asking.
November 25th, 2009 at 5:29 pm
Zebra,
You are truly hogging the gas pipe. You have the delusions of the true believer. I suspect, on your mantle, in a revered spot, is a gold framed photograph of Alf Landon, autographed in 1936. If Fox News was around, he would be on it. If book signings were the vogue in 1936, he’d have been on the trail. If polls were in, he would have been stratospheric among the GOP, panting to rid themselves of the hated Liberal, Roosevelt.Anybody, who had a remote chance in 1936, failed the true believer litmus and was shunted aside so Alf could blast through to electoral oblivion in November. Hopefully, most GOP voters want to win in 2012, not just be …..what ? In Sarah’s case, I’m not sure what ” What ” is, since she has never stayed around any job long enough to find out. Her resume is, at best ” Discontinuous”
November 25th, 2009 at 5:51 pm
Mike Huckabee 58% / 30% {+28%}
-A lot of voters just waitin’ for another HUCKABOOM!
Mitt Romney 49% / 38% {+11%}
-Best showing in a long time.
Barack Obama 48% / 51% {-3%}
-LOL LOL LOL
November 25th, 2009 at 6:10 pm
IF Dobbs takes votes almost exclusively from the GOP side, why doesn’t he run as a GOP candidate? He’d have as much chance of winning the nomination as he would winning the General as a 3rd party candidate…
November 25th, 2009 at 6:11 pm
“I suspect, on your mantle, in a revered spot, is a gold framed photograph of Alf Landon, autographed in 1936. If Fox News was around, he would be on it. If book signings were the vogue in 1936, he’d have been on the trail. If polls were in, he would have been stratospheric among the GOP, panting to rid themselves of the hated Liberal, Roosevelt.Anybody, who had a remote chance in 1936, failed the true believer litmus and was shunted aside so Alf could blast through to electoral oblivion in November.”
You need a little work on your history. The historical analogy would be Mitt=Landon. Let me refer you to a few factoids about Landon, who was the quintessential GOP moderate:
“Landon supported Theodore Roosevelt’s Progressive Party in 1912″
Sounds like Mitt’s disavowal of Reagan Bush in the debate with Ted Kennedy.
“Landon respected and admired Roosevelt and accepted much of the New Deal but objected that it was hostile to business and involved too much waste and inefficiency.”
Sounds like Mitt’s endorsement of the socialized MassCare debacle. He disagrees with Obama only because he thinks he could run his big government operation more efficiently.
“Landon proved to be an ineffective campaigner who rarely traveled.”
Again, it reminds me of Mitt who couldn’t draw a crowd of 5000 if he was passing out C notes. And yea. It sounds like Landon’s personality and skills are really analogous to Palin’s. The guy was boring, which was, and remains, the worst vice of a politician. Another attribute he shares with Mittens. Neither of them could have gotten as much free media as Palin simply because no one wants to watch them.
Landon true believer?
“In November 1962, when he was asked to describe his political philosophy, Landon said: “I would say practical progressive, which means that the Republican party or any political party has got to recognize the problems of a growing and complex industrial civilization. And I don’t think the Republican party is really wide awake to that.” Later in the 1960s, Landon backed President Lyndon Johnson on Medicare and other Great Society programs.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alf_Landon
You are so hopelessly misled. Please do a little research. In the internet age, there is really no excuse for being so factually inaccurate. You make it far too easy for me.
November 25th, 2009 at 6:11 pm
Fox News Sunday (November 29th)
Huckabee and Howard Dean square off!
November 25th, 2009 at 6:22 pm
I don’t where you get that data but here’s the latest at rasmussenreports.com
Dobbs in 2012 Gets Up to 14% of Vote, Hurts GOP Chances (Wednesday, November 25, 2009)
Former CNN anchor Lou Dobbs has indicated that he might consider an independent bid for the White House in 2012, and early polling shows he could attract up to 14% of the vote. However, some of that is almost certainly a generic protest vote as an unnamed “some other candidate” picks up between six percent (6%) and nine percent (9%) of the vote in similar 2012 match-ups.
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that if the choice is between President Obama, former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney and Dobbs, Obama leads 42% to 34% with Dobbs pulling 14% of the vote.
With Mike Huckabee as the Republican nominee, Obama leads 42% to 36%, with Dobbs at 12%.
If Sarah Palin is the GOP nominee, it’s Obama 44%, Palin 37% and Dobbs 12%.
(Want a free daily e-mail update? If it’s in the news, it’s in our polls). Rasmussen Reports updates are also available on Twitter or Facebook.
Obviously, it’s way too early to evaluate the political environment for the 2012 election, and it’s important to remember that four years ago Obama would not have been considered a serious national challenger for 2008. For Dobbs, the data shows how improbable such an independent bid could be.
With Dobbs out of the equation, Obama and Romney are tied at 44%, Obama leads Huckabee 45% to 41%, and the president leads Palin 46% to 43%.
The similarity of results regardless of the GOP hopeful suggests that voters currently see the question simply as a referendum on the president. The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll shows that Obama’s ratings have recently fallen to the lowest levels of his term.
While the president has a long way to go before facing voters again himself, Democrats in Congress don’t have the same luxury. They trail the GOP on the Generic Congressional Ballot,and Democratic senators are struggling in Nevada, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Arkansas, Colorado and Illinois.
Dobbs is currently viewed favorably by 33% of likely voters nationwide and unfavorably by 42%. However, most of the opinions about him are soft. Just seven percent (7%) have a Very Favorable view and 16% hold a Very Unfavorable opinion.
For Romney, the numbers are 49% favorable and 38% unfavorable (14% Very Favorable, 10% Very Unfavorable).
Huckabee is better like with 58% offering a positive assessment and 30% negative, including 21% Very Favorable and 13% Very Unfavorable.
Opinions are strongest about Palin. Overall, her numbers come in at 46% favorable and 49% unfavorable. Those numbers include 27% with a Very Favorable opinion and 31% with a Very Unfavorable view.
Please sign up for the Rasmussen Reports daily e-mail update (it’s free) or follow us on Twitter or Facebook. Let us keep you up to date with the latest public opinion news.
Oh no! Somebody must have done a great mistake here!!! Rombots!?!?
November 25th, 2009 at 6:23 pm
For the record.
November 25th, 2009 at 6:29 pm
Let’s emphasize, so that even the “blind” people could even see:
*For Romney, the numbers are 49% favorable and 38% unfavorable (14% Very Favorable, 10% Very Unfavorable).
*Huckabee is better like with 58% offering a positive assessment and 30% negative, including 21% Very Favorable and 13% Very Unfavorable.
*Opinions are strongest about Palin. Overall, her numbers come in at 46% favorable and 49% unfavorable. Those numbers include 27% with a Very Favorable opinion and 31% with a Very Unfavorable view.
Analysis: At this point in time, favorable ratings speak for themselves while head to head count QUESTIONABLE.
November 25th, 2009 at 6:33 pm
Only Gov. Huckabee crossed the mighty number “50″ line of favorability.
Huckabee 2012! All the way! Fellow Huckabeez, let’s expand some more! Surely, more and more Americans are getting and accepting the message!
November 25th, 2009 at 6:41 pm
This post by Aron Goldman is another example of media twisting facts. Focusing on what is favorable to its targeted audience without looking or at least considering the IMPORTANT OTHER FACTS of a news worthy of broadcasting.
Go on, ignore that very important fact that somebody in the republican party (Mike Huckabee) is favored by a clear majority (at 58%) of the American people.
This type of propaganda did not work in IOWA last time. The people have learned. Americans are now thinking. Americans (not just republicans) are starting to have common sense.
Huckabee 2012! Unfounded criticisms set aside, Gov. Huckabee is the clear frontrunner.
November 25th, 2009 at 6:51 pm
Zebra, I don’t want to be at odds with you. I am not picking on Palin, and I certainly don’t want to rain on your parade. I am just calling the facts from the poll that we are citing.
If you have the inside crosstabs, then you can see what I do. There are four entries for each category. The entires are (i) GOP Candidate (i.e., Palin, Romney, Huckabee), (ii) Obama, (iii) some other candidate (meaning any other candidate but the one in question, so it would include others in the poll) and (iv) not sure. In almost every category (and there are lots of them), Palin is at her top — in other words, under “not sure” it hovers only between 2% and 0. That factor, plus her -3 negative ratio, really boxes her in. In contrast, for Huckabee, it is just the reverse, the “not sure” is fairly big (it is actually almost the same number as the “vote for some other candidate” is for Palin), so the undecideds plus his +28 likeability factor allows potential growth. Thus, although Palin and Huckabee are very close on the surface — 3 and 4 points respectively — the inside numbers show that Huckabee has lots more undecideds (and growth potential), whereas Palin has the same number citing they would vote for “another candidate.” Romney has less “undecideds” than Huckabee also (and arguably less growth), but he is already tied with Obama.
I agree with you — polls this early out really don’t mean much — and this poll, in particular, suggests Obama’s vunerability rather than any GOP candidate’s strength. But you look at the trends at this point — which is all we can do — the favorability, the undecideds, the growth potential — and that is what I am attempting to do. Everything — absolutely everything — is subject to change.
As for media accessibility — I am not deciding who is legitimate and who is fair and balanced. But I am suggesting that the vast majority of likely voters — those who do NOT watch FOX either exclusively or at all — are going to want to see a variety of interviews. She will be pilloried as she was in 2008 if she limits herself.
November 25th, 2009 at 6:59 pm
“Sounds like Mitt’s disavowal of Reagan Bush in the debate with Ted Kennedy.”
Actually zebra, you may not be aware of this, because it is rarely reported, but if you listened to the context of that, Mitt was disavowing the tax and budget increases that happened during the Reagan administration.
“Sounds like Mitt’s endorsement of the socialized MassCare debacle”
What is socialized about it? There is no public option, and the mandates caused people to move off of the public doll and pay their own way. Socialized is what they had BEFORE the plan when people walked in and got free care on the backs.
November 25th, 2009 at 7:11 pm
It’s good to see all of the candidates doing well against Obama. I think this looks good for Mitt, because he, essentially has been out of the public limelight. In the blogging world we know he is writing OPed,s giving speeches, and campaigning for conservative republicans all over the USA. But, the general public hears little about that. When he feels it the right time, he’ll rise out of obscurity, and I think people will like what they see.
My feeling is that this time Mitt will do very little in the way of comparison ads, so that noone can point to him as running a negative campaign. I’m not going to brag a lot about this poll, but I do think it is an eye-opener for what I have been preaching for a very long time, and that is that fav/unfavs are not that critical with our particular candidates. In Huckabee’s case, many people do like his folksy manner, and he is right on many of the issues, so he does well on favs/unfavs. Huckabee is 17% higher than Mitt on the difference in favorables, but does 4% worse. The exact same thing has happened when doing Republican polling on Sarah….many in the party like her, but few believe her qualified to run for President. However, when matched up against Obama, many would still vote for her, in spite of thinking she is not ready, because Obama is a catastrophe.
November 25th, 2009 at 7:12 pm
Why are we still having to refute these lies about Gov. Romney. Everyone here knows them. The facts have been debated ad nauseum during 2007 and 2008. Yet new people keep appearing to lob bombs at Gov. Romney. People come here for a civil discussion of the issues, not to see thread wars. You don’t like Gov. Romney, we get it. Now move on, this is not FreeRepublic, where we are all supposed to walk in lockstep and bow down to the fringe right. We are all conservatives, but not all conservatives should be expected to think the same about their leaders. I’d rather be discussing our candidates views and strategic moves than talk about what they said in 2005. We’ve already been down that road. Let’s try and move on.
November 25th, 2009 at 7:19 pm
#97
“She will be pilloried as she was in 2008 if she limits herself.”
Voter, I think we both agree that this poll is of very limited utility. And I am not trying to be contentious. But Palin is going to be pilloried regardless of her media strategy. She would be wise to choose her own strategy and let the MSM continue its drift to irrelevance. SHe does not need them at all. They are swarming around her like locusts not because they like her but for two reasons: First, they genuinely fear her. Their actions speak louder than their words. If she was no threat to their annointed one, they would not be inclined to pay any attention to her.
Second, and no less important, she generates huge ratings boosts for them. She is interesting, and perhaps the worst disability of all for a politician is to be uninteresting. It is the kiss of death. The MSM hates her, but they are addicted to the ratings. So they follow her, attacking as they go. I think the volume and the unfairness of the attacks is starting to generate, if not a backlash, at least a “tune out” in which the general public dismisses what the MSM says about her. This should make her less susceptible to criticism in 2012 since they will have already used everything they had in the interim. Huck and Romney are still going to get a good “going over” for their records, so they stand to lose a good bit of support as the primaries approach.
All I can say about your cross tabs is that the opinions are the strongest about Palin, both pro and con. The same was true of Reagan. His high negatives, and they were higher than Palin’s were based not on reality but based on the media driven perception. Once Reagan got into the debate with Carter, People saw he was not evil and crazy and they liked him. 44 states and 489 electoral votes. The negative opinions Palin are not etched in stone, but I think the positive ones pretty much are. And she has the highest favorablity ratings of any of the GOP candidates. In other words, she is the most likely to be nominated. That is step One.
Step Two occurs if the Ameircan people want to fire Obama after one term. If that is the case< Palin is the only alternative if she is the GOP nominee.
Anyway, that is my take on it.
November 25th, 2009 at 7:25 pm
I have no access to the cross tabs, so if any of you that do would like to share, I would appreciate it. Thanks.
November 25th, 2009 at 7:27 pm
“Actually zebra, you may not be aware of this, because it is rarely reported, but if you listened to the context of that, Mitt was disavowing the tax and budget increases that happened during the Reagan administration.”
No I am not aware of it, because it didn’t happen that way. I watched the whole debate. He was disavowing Reagan, because he was a conservative.
Reagan a tax hiker? Get your facts straight. He cut the top marginal rate from 70% to 28%, with a Democrat Congress in place!!! The budget increases were necessary to build up our defenses to defeat the USSR. I assume you approve of that.
And Reagan’s domestic budgets were always smaller than the ones the Democrats (who controlled the House for his entire two terms) sent him. Nice try.
BTW, A mandate by Government is socialism, or socialism lite, in my book, whether or not there is a public option. And there is a government funded option in Mass Care.
November 25th, 2009 at 7:33 pm
Maybe you would like to post that debate IN IT’s entirety, since you seem to have access to it zebra. I would love to see it. I honestly have only seen the small snippet, but I’ve been told that the context of what Mitt was saying about not returning to Reagan was concerned with the budget increases.
Yes, he cut the rate substantially, but other taxes were raised. The budget went up by a whole lot more than the military expenditures…nice try by you!
November 25th, 2009 at 7:37 pm
It concerns me as a member of our party to see us demonize the media as we do. I know that Gov. Palin did not have fair coverage. However, America needs a functioning press. The answer isn’t to take our ball and go home. The modern conservative movement has had great success at creating an alternative media. The long-term solution is to merge the new media with old media. If conservatives ignore old media, than old media will further ignore conservatives. Thus, the people in the middle, will get worse and worse information, further isolating our cause.
We should meet injustice with truth, not with demonization such as “lamestream media”.
November 25th, 2009 at 7:38 pm
http://committedtoromney.com/?p=3135
Geraghty putting Mitt’s statement in context. Ill take his word over yours until you can prove him wrong.
November 25th, 2009 at 7:42 pm
Polls go up. Polls go down. The bottom line is once again we have three candidates within five points of Obama. That should warm the cockles of every heart on this board — save for our resident liberals/Democrats, of course.
November 25th, 2009 at 7:44 pm
It looks like Jim was on the other side of that argument, sorry! Gov. Romney has a record. His critics should check it out instead of trying to make Romney an offender for a word.
November 25th, 2009 at 7:47 pm
107.
For the Win!
November 25th, 2009 at 7:50 pm
sorry asparagus, the point still stands though….that’s what was being discussed, the rising spending during that time, and deficits.
November 25th, 2009 at 7:52 pm
90 Zebra,
By the way, do you work in the NFL?
Nevertheless, let’s look at some facts , indeed. Alf Landon was the GOP’s Grand Old Man in 1936, even though he was only 50 years old. That’s because he was the only Republican Governor elected ” West of the Mississippi” in 1932. He campaigned on cutting government spending, lowering tax rates, a balanced budget, a moratorium on mortgage foreclosures and tighter control of utility bills. He was re-elected in 1934.In 1936, Landon was nominated on the first ballot. The GOP said ” God has his hand on Alf Landon’s shoulder.”
His big supporter was William Randolph Hearst and the Hearst Newspapers. ( Ever hear of Rupert Murdoch , Zebra ? ). In 1936, he ran on his results in Kansas, claiming that the Dems seemed ” obsessed with the idea that they had a mandate to control American business, American agriculture and American life. Hearst Newspapers said that the Soviet Union had ordered American Communists to vote for FDR.
In October, 1936, the Liberty poll showed Landon with a lead over FDR and predicted his win. We all know the results. All I am saying is that the nation was more complicated than Landon thought in 1936 and FAR< FAR more complicated today than Mrs Palin even remotely understands. It will take a really superior candidate to beat Obama in 2012, a candidate with the intellectual brilliance to challenge the President on ideas and beat him on arguments, to communicate not just with the minority of GOP voters but to the majority of independent votes and , yes, to dissatisfied Democratic voters. It will take a candidate who can campaign in 50 states effectively, not just in "cherry picked" conservative bastions. And it will take a candidate with a record of challenge and achievement, not difficulties and disengagement.
Hope this helps.
November 25th, 2009 at 8:00 pm
111
“By the way, do you work in the NFL?”
I am not a Mitt fan, but what a cheap shot that was!!!LOL
November 25th, 2009 at 8:07 pm
Zebra, would you now care to admit that you either didn’t really watch the whole debate after all, your memory was bad, or that you were just using the same meme that you’ve read so many times and viewed in that little bitty video of about 10 seconds? Or did you even read the link to show the context???????
November 25th, 2009 at 8:52 pm
And the merry-go-round keeps spinning. Where it will end up, no one knows, but I do like what marK says in #107.
Go Conservatives!
November 26th, 2009 at 1:48 am
Okay, well i couldn’t stay away for long apparently. Have to chime in on this one.
1. I’m very proud of all of our candidates. They are showing strength that we need.
2. Mitt is definitely in a much more positive position for the general than most of us thought.
3. People keep talking about how upside down the favorables are for the candidates. Let me talk about favorables. All they really prove is the CEILING for a particular candidate. Someone with better approvals will have a POTENTIALLY higher ceiling. Mitt Romney is VERY viable in a general election…but his ceiling is lower. That’s NOT necessarily bad, as he has already proven that he can reach his potential…which is much more important than having a really high ceiling, but NOT capitalizing on it and being stuck down low. He still has time to improve his ceiling…but that is still not as important as reaching your potential on your current ceiling. Mitt needs to come off as more authentic, and APOLOGETIC. None of this “persecution” garbage. He needs to admit his mistakes, and tell us HOW he is going to make up for that.
BTW: If I was running the Romney campaign, HE WOULD WIN BIG. I have no doubt, but I am not running it, and therefore he will probably be stuck with the same stupid assed people he had last time…who were MORONS. Come on. I’ve got an IQ of 136, and it seems to me that the entire hierarchy of the Romney campaign should’ve been able to do better than they did with him. He seemed unprepared for confrontation. He was horrible on core issues(not wrong, just didn’t come off authentic enough..or with enough ZING to show intelligent thought on specific issues).
He needs to focus on SPENDING CUTS(WITH SPECIFICS ABOUT WHERE THOSE CUTS WILL BE), tax cuts after the spending cuts to push the economy, COMPETENT military spending cuts(i like my military strong, but we shouldn’t be policing the world)…talk passionately about abortion and WHY HE IS PRO-LIFE, emphasize that he made mistakes on the issue in the past, but that he has seen “the light” and what a horrible practice it is. He needs to stay off of the gay marriage, gay military thing. It’s not in his nature to push on that sorta social issue, stay away. Come up with a stump that is inspiring without seeming plastic. Be a tall, strong man. Don’t take CRAP from people. When they are wrong tell them, when you are wrong admit it. Give praise to other conservative leaders. DON’T GO NEGATIVE ON REPUBLICAN RIVALS.
November 26th, 2009 at 12:26 pm
I wish you all the happiness you can have this Thanksgiving, and the strength to transcend that which you can’t have.
Go Mike and Sarah!!
November 26th, 2009 at 6:24 pm
Mitt Romney is a good man.
But not for President.
We need greatness at this time in our history.
Sarah Palin or Mike Huckabee, one or both.
November 26th, 2009 at 9:38 pm
The fact remains: no matter how weak and small the republican party is right now, SOMEBODY in that small and minority party, that “party of no” is favored by the majority of the American people.
What is the use of winning a plurality? no clear mandate from the people.
I congratulate Romney, Palin, and Gov. Huckabee for closing in on Obama. I congratulate more Gov. Huckabee for winning the hearts of the clear majority of the American people.
Ladies and gentlemen, the mainstream media may ignore this again as always, but Gov. Huckabee is the handsome and fresh face of the of the republican party.
November 26th, 2009 at 9:46 pm
With all the press attention she has gotten lately a Palin 49% negative rating is a bad sign for her. This is her moment with no serious scrutiny, and yet still high negatives.
November 26th, 2009 at 11:22 pm
The best ticket in 2012; Dobbs/Romney or Romney/Dobbs. Two serious competent men who are not ideologues or political hacts and would put this country back on the right path.