Thursday, December 15, 2011

Gallup Daily Tracking Poll: Newt Gingrich lead..."Slip Slidin' Away

8 Points since December 8

A survey of at least 1,000 registered Republicans and Republican-leaning independents was conducted December 10-14, 2011. The MOE is +/-3%.

The trends and Data can be viewed HERE.
Older trends HERE.


Please check us out on Facebook and If you like what you see, please "Like" us. You can find us here.

34 comments:

Right Wingnut said...

That's great, but aren't you even the slightest bit concerned that Romney still hasn't shown the ability to crack 25%? To me, that's the real story here. Newt slips, but the people who left him are picking NONE OF THE ABOVE. That does not bode well for Mitt in the general if he wins the nomination.

Good grief, what a shitty field. Worst of my lifetime.

Graham said...

RWN--

I'll concede that Romney's not a perfect conservative. I was a RomBot last time, and still am this time, I make no bones about that. And yes, nobody has been able to prove themself to be a better candidate.

But if he gets the nomination, will you be so disenchanted as to support another party in the general? Do you know/talk with many people who express that sentiment?

(Serious question, I'd like to get a barometer on this so I know what to expect.)

G

Ohio JOE said...

I for one would probably hold my nose and vote for Mr. Romney, in part because of the Supreme Court. It would be a little more difficult to support Mr. Gingrich.

Graham said...

And yeah, this is a curious mix of candidates this time around. There are a few that I could get behind, but each of them has at least one of my big dealbreakers hanging around their neck (and this is just me.)

I'm in favor of Governors becoming presidents. That narrows it to Huntsman, Romney, Perry, and Johnson.

But Perry's proven himself a dunce, and his immigration stance doesn't work for me.

Huntsman on Cap-n-Trade, no bueno. Moreover I don't like him personally, and I don't think he's conservative enough.

Johnson's stance on pot and abortion--especially the latter--are a no-no.

But I was already supporting Romney anyway.

If I were to get behind anyone else in the current field, it'd probably be Santorum. If I had to.

Terrye said...

RWN:

Who has been able to crack 50%?

To be honest, I had hoped that someone like Mitch Daniels would get in the race. I live in Indiana and I have to say that he has been a good Governor and is conservative.

of course he has also been trashed by a bunch of rightie bloggers and loud mouth talk radio morons who have lied about his record, called him a Rino and all kinds of ridiculous crap. I think he decided not to put his family through all that.

And that might be why you don't see other people trying for this job..go thank Rush Limbaugh and Levin and Beck and Malkin who would undoubtedly savage them right along with the liberal media.

Right Wingnut said...

terrye,

Who mentioned 50%? I'm talking about 25%. The 24% in today's poll is his HIGH WATER mark over the past few weeks. In many state polls, he's in the teens.

Don't get me wrong, he has the advantage of organization and money, but after 5 years of running for president, at what point would you expect his advantages to translate into results in the polls....especially given the overall weakness of the rest of the field.

In '08, we had 4-5 relatively strong candidates. By strong, I'm referring to the ability to generate some excitement among voters while demonstrating the ability to articulate their positions without tripping over their tongues on the debate stage.

Right Wingnut said...

Graham,

I have not witnessed any excitement over Romney in my neck of the woods. Some of your friends won't believe me, but I don't know a single Romney supporter. I'm sure most of them will vote for the nominee regardless who it is. Will some of them vote third party? Doubtful. Will some stay home? I don't know. I don't forsee many of them opening up their wallets or volunteering for him campaign. On the flip side, I see Obama 2012 bumper stickers everywhere I go.

newark hawk said...

In a 7-person race, with several high profile candidates, Romney's ~25% support is not all that bad for a frontrunner. Especially when you consider the fact that Romney has been attacked far more frequently and far more viciously by the establishment media - cable news & talk radio - than any other candidate in the race. Yet despite these attacks, Romney remains the heavy favorite to win the GOP nomination, and to then take down Obama in November.

Right Wingnut said...

newark,

Wrong. In the past, "next-in-line" candidates have typically faired much better than 25% by this stage in the game.

Bear in mind that Perry, Newt, Bachmann, and Santorum are all fighting for the same voters. The only other candidate that Mitt has to worry about losing votes to is Hunstman.

BOSMAN said...

RWN,

"That's great, but aren't you even the slightest bit concerned that Romney still hasn't shown the ability to crack 25%?"

NO!

Terrye said...

I don't recall saying you did say anything about 50%...my point is that no one has reached the majority in any poll.

As for Romney running for a long time..well remember the last time he ran Rush and his minions were supporting him...this time they turned on him. I think that has dampened his appeal for many in the base.

Graham said...

RWN--

Re: the bumper stickers. That's true of pretty much every candidate in a head-to-head with Obama. Once we know who our nominee is, I suspect that will change.

Terrye said...

BTW, RWN..I know a lot of people in my neck of the woods who are supporting Romney..so maybe you are just running with the wrong people...or maybe people just do not want to talk to you about their politics.

Lionhead said...

So, as of 12/14/11 let's see who is the 'more reliable' conservative:

http://i44.tinypic.com/34ou5x3.jpg

Instead of relying on polls put out by progressive news outlets & universities, let's have a larger sampling nationwide.

Romney is a 25%er & will have a horrible time in attracting the Constitutional conservatives. As far as I'm concerned, he shows himself as this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WKHzTtr_lNk

Moreover, I'm sure there are millions that feel as I do. Sorry, Rombots, drone on as you might, but the facts remain.

Right Wingnut said...

Grahm @ 5:14,

With all due respect, I highly doubt it.

Right Wingnut said...

Terrye,

I live in the most conservative part of the most conservative district in the state...Michele Bachmann's district. In other words, the only district in Minnesota that Bachmann would have a prayer of winning. If they tinker with her district (which they are talking about doing), she's toast.

Back on topic...people around here aren't excited about any of them.

Graham said...

RWN

I had no idea you were in Minnesota. No wonder everything makes you upset. Move toward the warmth, brutha.

Right Wingnut said...

Just to add...I bet Bachmann won't even win her own district on caucus night. The campaign has really damaged her around here. People don't appreciate her self description as an "Iowan." She'll need to do well here, since the caucus is in early February. Good luck with that.

Right Wingnut said...

Another point on Bachmann...people in MN don't like the way she went after Pawlenty. Some conservatives have a few issues with him, but he WAS our governor for 8 years, and won some tough battles in a tough political climate. A year earlier, she said she would probably back his run for president.

Anonymous said...

RWN...I totally agree with your sentiments. Romney hasn't been able to crack 25% and that does worry me. I've always thought that it was because of a couple things and if you don't mind some bloviating, I'll take a stab.

1. Romney is no Rockstar. We only really have two of those in the party...Palin and Christie ( I know you disagree with me about Christie, but I believe he's a force). Palin is our true "star" in the party but the left and right both limited her rise and labeled her as a "dummy". However, there are plenty of us out here that know the truth about Sarah. Because she was the star, and had a loyal following, the likes we haven't seen since Reagan, Mitt obviously became the "anti-Palin". Once Obamacare passed it became much easier to throw the "liberal" tag on Mitt and most of those in the conservative media fell right in line with that sentiment.
2. Just like Sarah was labeled as a "dummy" Romney has been labeled as the flipflopin Mormon Moderate. Every report on 2012 elections over the last two years has made sure that we are all well aware of RomneyCare and what a "gigantic" stumbling block that was for Mitt with many reports calling him dead on arrival because of it. So the meme became "Romney the Socialized medicine loving, flipflopin liberal"
3. Since the cycle has started, our entire field has been referred to as weak and that Romney is a weak frontrunner. I cannot count how many times I have heard that phrase used to describe Romney. Our party has been searching for anyone to take him down, including the establishment early on. McCain didn't break 30% ever in 08' and yet we didn't hear ad nauseum that 80% of the nation wants anyone but McCain...even if that was true. And yet, the "70% of the party wants anyone but Romney" line gets used in print and on video multiple times a day.

These perceptions that are constantly sewn by the press DOES leave a mark. You should know this better than anyone because you are such a Palin fan. Just look at how many people on the right embraced this line of thinking about Sarah...not to mention the middle and the left. Now Sarah would have overcome most of that sentiment on the Right had she decided to run and would more than likely have won this primary waking away (in my opinion). She had the gift, that so few public leaders have. When you listen to Sarah, you can't help but believe her sincerity...Mitt doesn't have that gift.
Mitt's gift is competancy and sound leadership abilities. You don't succeed in leadership in four VERY different areas without having a particular intangible gift of competancy and focus. His gift is hard to quantify and sell in a political world dominated by sound bites and now "charisma." So he has tried to make up for that lack of "what Sarah has in Spades" and built a campaign around competancy and focus...a much harder sell because they are unseen intangibles.
To Romney's credit, he has whethered the storms fairly well. He is also a very competant communicator...he doesn't necesarily inspire but he doesn't really put you to sleep either(calling John Derry and John McCain). I don't see a Romney Presidency marked by outlandish media events and flashy appearances and endless campaigning, but more behind the scenes work staying focused on the task at hand. Again, in our age of instant media, this is a hard trait to sell people on.

Sorry for the four page post, but I figured I'd take a sincere stab at what I believe was a sincere question by RWN.

Gordon

Anonymous said...

Let's not overlook the fact that Romney has rarely dropped below the 20% mark. And among 7 other candidates who have all floated from single digits to double digits this is very telling. It says that no matter what happens in Iowa on caucus night there will be at least 20% of possible caucus-goers who will NOT be swayed to another candidate. That is a huge asset to have in an unpredictable Iowa caucus environment. The only other candidate with that large of a solid following is Paul. And if Paul wins Iowa then Iowa gets written off entirely! And it's basically a fresh start in New Hampshire.

-Phil

leighrow said...

RWN

So RWN if you admit Tim Pawlenty had a challenging time implementing conservative legislation, while governing one of the more liberal states in the country, then you should be able to understand Governor Romney's predicament while governing the most liberal state in the country.

In MA only 13 % of the electorate is Republican. The MA legislature was going to pass universal healthcare in MA regardless of who was governor. After all when you have so large a majority, you have no problem in overriding a governor's veto. The governor is sort of held hostage by the legislature and has to be quite clever and industrious on how to work with the legislature to produce conservative bills.

In this environment Romney was able to reduce the deficit from 3 billion to a 1 billion surplus. He was able to veto the instate tuition for illegals and he was able to pass immigration law that gave the MA state police the ability to enforce immigration law.

While all of the other states in the Northeast signed the cap and trade legislation...Romney did not sign on, even though Republicans like Patacki from New York signed on. Romney vetoed over 800 amendments and bills while governor.
Romney actually made notable progress in moving the state to the right.

The bottom line is that being a conservative governor in the most liberal state is completely different than being a conservative governor in a conservative state.

Rick Perry was a conservative governor in a conservative state and signed instate tuition for illegals,he also proposed a bi-national healthcare proposal between Mexico and Texas.The size of government also doubled while Perry has been governor.

Huntsman was also a governor of the most conservative state Utah and he signs off on cap and trade and instate tuition and driver licenses for illegal aliens. Spending increased significantly in Utah under Huntsman.

I wish these contrasts were highlighted or reported more by the pundits and media.

hamaca said...

If Romney's flat 25% is a concern, what does that mean about the others? Bachmann? Perry? Cain? And now Newt? Have any of them been able to remain above 10% for longer than a month or two?

Right Wingnut said...

Leighrow, you're joking right? Pawlenty governed much more conservatively than Romney. Conservatives here were upset about a freaking cigarette tax, and state wide indoor smoking ban. Romneys issues are a whole 'nuther animal.

Nice try.

Right Wingnut said...

I actually wish Pawlenty hadn't dropped out.

leighrow said...

RW

You missed my point. MN is liberal but it is not as liberal as MA so Pawlenty could govern more conservatively in MN than MA.

MA's electorate has only 13 percent Republicans whereas MN's electorate has between 30-35 percent Republican.

I also liked Pawlenty, and I was really disappointed that he dropped out early. He like Romney is a very capable leader.

Right Wingnut said...

Thanks for the sincere response, Gordon. Much of what you say may be true, but the lack of enthusiasm is what it is.

Right Wingnut said...

leighrow,

Pawlenty hasn't wavered on core conservative issues, like life, marriage, gun rights (he signed a conceal & carry law), etc. He wavered on a few minor things to get stuff through. That's far different than the complete makeover Romney underwent after he decided to run for president.

Right Wingnut said...

Pawlenty also won reelection...something Romney would not have been able to do.

Right Wingnut said...

I think your estimate of 30-35% Republicans in MN is a tad high. I'm willing to be wrong, but where did you get that number?

leighrow said...

RW

A friend of mine who works for the Republican party told me that a few years back.

Right Wingnut said...

SurveyUSA hit 30+ a couple times in the past two years. That's higher than usual, so I'll give you that one. It's typically mid-upper 20's.

Right Wingnut said...

It was as low as 23% at one point in 2010.

Ashley Jones said...

Romney was great in tonight's debate. And that was despite the fact that Fox tried very hard to hurt him w/a couple of questions and kept him totally out of the game for 40 minutes straight. He nailed every answer.