Posted on 12/29/2011 9:34:58 PM PST by neverdem
Mitt Romney has now jumped to his biggest lead ever over President Obama in a hypothetical Election 2012 matchup. It’s also the biggest lead a named Republican candidate has held over the incumbent in Rasmussen Reports surveying to date.
The latest national telephone survey finds that 45% of Likely U.S. Voters favor the former Massachusetts governor, while 39% prefer the president. Ten percent (10%) like some other candidate in the race, and six percent (6%) are undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
A week ago, Romney trailed Obama 44% to 41%. The week before that, he held a slight 43% to 42% edge over the president. The two candidates have been essentially tied in regular surveys since January, but Romney remains the only GOP hopeful to lead Obama in more than one survey. Despite Romney’s current six-point lead, his latest level of support is in line with the 38% to 45% he has earned in matchups with the president this year. However, Obama’s 39% is a new low: Prior to this survey, his support has ranged from 40% to 46% in matchups with Romney.
A generic Republican candidate holds a narrow lead over the president again this week as has been the case all but three times in weekly tracking...
--snip--
In his latest matchup with the president, Romney holds a 20-point lead among male voters but trails by six among female voters. The Republican posts a 45% to 29% lead among voters not affiliated with either of the major political parties.
Romney earns an overwhelming 75% of the vote from those Tea Party members, while the president leads 49% to 37% among those who are not part of the grass roots movement.Obama has 65% support from the Political Class. Romney leads 51% to 31% among Mainstream voters...
(Excerpt) Read more at rasmussenreports.com ...
“Bush did what he thought he had to do to defend the nation.”
No Child Left Behind? Campaign Finance Reform? Amnesty? Medicare Part D? Lightbulb ban? Billions for AIDS in Africa? How did ANY of that and countless other instances of compassionate conservative drek “defend the nation??”
If Romney gets the nomination and is the Republican on the presidential ballot, no matter who he chooses for VP, my vote will go elsewhere. A vote for Romney in the presidential race would be a vote to strengthen liberalism in both the Republican and Democrat parties. Certainly many too-frightened-to-think-straight Republicans will argue "but ... but ... but ... we can't allow Obama to choose the next Supreme Court justices!" The REALITY is that Romney's record of appointing and supporting liberal activist judges tells us that his SJC appointments would be just as dangerous. As The Boss wrote on another thread a few days ago to someone raising the ol' SJC bugaboo:
Horse hockey!! I don’t want that liberal progressive abortionist, gay rights, gun grabbing, mandate loving, warmingist, statist/socialist, liberal judge appointing Mitt Romney anywhere close to appointing judges!!
“Never say never. I said the same thing about John McCain. Many of us on FR did. It took one very wise pick for a VP running mate (Palin) to change nearly every ones mind. Within days many of us McCain haters were reaching for our check books or asking how to volunteer. Whoever is nominated, be it Romney, Newt, Perry or whoever, they better remember why McCain picked Palin.”
I don’t care if Mitt Romney picks George Washington as his running mate. If he picks a true conservative, it would be nothing more than a calculated ploy to attract support for his candidacy, just like McCain. He will never see a sliver of support from me.
That’s funny. MSNBC was crowing just the other morning that Zero was leading his opponents by 5 points. Rasmussen poll was quoted.
“Get back to me when the primaries are closed to just Republicans.” Huh?
In any case McCain’s nomination was inevitable after Guliani was driven out of the race. Early on he was ignored by the party and almost out of money rather than being the candidate of any Establishment.
Anti-Globalism is just another anti-capitalist fraud. It is a big ploy by the “Occupy” movement you must have noticed.
By immigration I assume you mean Illegal Immigration though I would put a halt to all immigration unless you have great skills to contribute.
Everyone who actually wins elections is inevitably accused of being “establishment”. It is a fraudulent term and basically means someone you don’t like for various reasons.
Bush tried to make nice with the RATS to obtain his higher end. I didn’t say it worked. He had nothing to do with CFR. What amnesty? He campaigned on the drug program so everyone knew what he planned to do there. Reducing chaos in Africa does help the nation. The lightbulb ban was signed after he left office wasn’t it?
Realities are realities even for bunnies.
Not for enablers.
Reality does not need enablers. It proceeds of its own course while whiners whine about conspiracies.
And hero worshippers cover for their princes at any cost.
Its obvious that no amount of evidence will allow for you to admit what is patently obvious - Bush was a terrible President responsible for plenty of big government nonsense. Ignore it if you wish but burying one’s head in the sand generally isn’t a good idea.
And oblivious critics criticize no matter what even when they don’t know what they are talking about and/or misrepresent opponents points.
There appears to be no Kantian or Burkean thought coming from you. Both of them would recognize what was said and not go into an emotional reaction.
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.