Posted on 09/10/2012 4:49:02 PM PDT by Alter Kaker
Washington (AP) A Gallup Poll taken for Newsweek magazine puts the Democratic Mondale-Ferraro ticket ahead of President Reagan for the first time in a major public opinion survey.
The poll, taken as the Democratic convention was winding up on Thursday and Friday and after the candidates had received extensive primetime television coverage, found the team of Walter Mondale and Geraldine Ferraro endorsed by 48 percent of those polled.
Forty-six percent of the respondents said they favored the Republican ticket of Reagan and Vice President George Bush, while 6 percent said they were undecided about who they wanted to win the November election.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.google.com ...
Reagan (525 electoral votes); Mondale (13 electoral votes).
It is over - Reagan cannot win.
Time to pack it in - nominating Reagan was a disaster.
I am in “ignore the polls” mode. It’s mostly propaganda at this point in time. Just work hard and get people you know to vote.
Too bad Reagan didn’t immediately announce support for a large part of Mondale’s agenda and agree to speak at Jimmy Carter’s foundation — otherwise he might have actually been re-elected. < / SARC>
This is something a friend sent to me. It’s about David Axelrod and the Obama camp thinking about suing Gallup because they don’t like how they run polls. Klik the link and read. Pretty scary if true. http://visiontoamerica.com/12050/gallup-sued-by-doj-over-unfavorable-poll-numbers-for-obama/
Trump was just on FOX and said Reagan needs to get a lot tougher on Mondale.
You're mostly right. But, IMHO, the measurable level of depression here on good old FR is about 99% due to the Rasmussen polls. The other 1% perhaps to Gallup. The rest have been and continue to be properly discounted.
And some are discounting even the Rasmussen poll since we can't seem to get a handle on the R/D/I split. A few weeks back we heard that it was R+1.
Has Rasmussen changed his mind about his Turnout Model? Who knows. The Shadow perhaps, but not me.
Wag the dog...
Time to pack it in - nominating Reagan was a disaster.
If I were you (or a Romney supporter) I would not be answering those polls showing Romney down by citing 30 year old polls.
It makes it look like you are desperate and could not find a recent 2012 poll that shows Romney ahead.
Let me help you there:
Romney leads 49% to 46%
http://americanresearchgroup.com/
Now stop looking so desperate by posting examples of polls back in 1984, 1988. Sooner or later someone will post a poll or two from the same date back then showing Reagan, Bush1, Dole or McCain ahead.
Assume these polls are correct and the worst that will happen is a landslide. Assume they are wrong and you’re implying there’s no need to make any changes in this campaign and there’s no need to fight harder.
The best and easiest way to prove the polls showing Romney 2012 down is to provide a poll showing Romney 2012 up.
It just looks desperate and stupid to post 30 year old articles to try to prove “Romney is winning”. That’s what we call “SPIN”.
By the way, Romney is NO Ronald Reagan.
That is pretty silly - it is a poll from December 2007 - not at all comparable, but you present it as though it is.
Have you posted your source for the “internals” you stated flatly as fact yesterday yet?
Oh yea, I remember 2hen I heard the autoworkers saying that there was no way they were going to vote for Fritz and Tits, I know it was over for Mondale. He couldn’t even get the union vote.
If I had stated that Republican internals showing Romney down yesterday without a link I was probably referring to a politico article and what I've been hearing from others. Neither of them I would never be able to claim "as fact" without a real source. Do you have a link to my statement claiming that it is factual or are you just quoting what I said based on what's been going around?
At this point, I've seen no polling data (except one which I posted) that would prove those alledged numbers to be incorrect. So, just WHO really has the burden of proof that Romney is ahead?
Mondale’s convention went before Reagan’s. And after the GOP convention, Reagan had a huge lead he never lost. Trying to explain way Romney’s rotten poll numbers by making inaccurate comparisons doesn’t help anything, imo.
Wrong question. YOU have the burden of proof that shows a citation for the Romney camp having an internal poll showing he was down five in Ohio.
That was your flat claim, one that you refuse to back or retract.
THAT is the burden of proof.
But, as usual, you will ignore the demand. That is because you are a duplicitous and bald-faced liar.
The poll, taken as the Democratic convention was winding up on Thursday and Friday and after the candidates had received extensive primetime television coverage, found the team of Walter Mondale and Geraldine Ferraro endorsed by 48 percent of those polled.
Forty-six percent of the respondents said they favored the Republican ticket of Reagan and Vice President George Bush, while 6 percent said they were undecided about who they wanted to win the November election.
If ONLY we had nominated a Nice Moderate like George Romney! None of this would have happened! Reagan was a disappointment!
No, I do not. I NEVER said Romney was down 5% in Ohio specifically but down 5% period.
My sources are just about EVERY poll out there and I have no reason to believe that the GOP internals reflect anything differently.
YOU have the burden of PROOF to show us that Romney is beating Obama. Not me.
That was for the popular vote not electoral vote. I think you are confused.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.