Posted on 09/17/2011 1:31:07 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Two weeks ago, it was Perry 44, Obama 41. Today, this. What happened? Oh … right.
Although…
Perry trails Obama by 15 percentage points among women and barely leads among men. Perry trails among voters under 40, runs even among 40-somethings and leads among those 50 and older. It’s worth remembering that most voters over 40 voted against Obama in 2008.
Perry currently attracts just 71% of the Republican vote, while the president wins 85% of Democrats. Among voters not affiliated with either party, the race is a toss-up.
His numbers among Republicans will soar if he’s the nominee, as they would for any other candidate in the field, but I’m not sure what to make of the fact that he leads O among the over-50 crowd. Like Ras says, that’s to be expected given Obama’s track record in 2008, but maybe it’s also anecdotal evidence that Social Security isn’t hurting Perry as badly as we think. Could be his numbers are down simply because his overall performance at the debates has been lackluster, especially given the high expectations that accompanied his “big hoss”/white knight persona when he jumped in. In fact, Rasmussen’s crosstabs reveal that Perry leads Obama 49/38 among voters aged 65 or over. In 2008, McCain won that demographic 53/45. Perry’s outperforming him — for the moment.
Another data point from Gallup. Note the line on independents:
(CHART AT LINK)
Worse than this, perhaps, is that pluralities of both Republicans (37 percent) and independents (40 percent) think Perry’s views on Social Security will hurt his election chances. That’s a potentially deadly liability, especially in a long primary race where electability may become more important the closer we get to the general campaign. If Romney and Perry are roughly even in delegates after two months and umpteen debates, undecideds may try to break the stalemate by looking to the most basic qualification of all — viability against Obama. And unless I’m missing something, there’s no obvious way for Perry to undo this perception that he’s less electable because of his Social Security views. Voters have heard for decades that it’s the “third rail of American politics”; they know Bush was routed when he tried to engage on privatization in 2005. Even if Perry comes up with his own reform plan — which may be in the works, as he’s now talking to Paul Ryan — the mere fact that this became a major issue early on may influence the public’s image of Perry going forward.
One more piece of bad news for Perryites:
The unemployment rate in Texas rose a bit in August to 8.5%, its highest rate since 1987.
That leaves the Lone Star State in the middle of the pack nationally, but it’s jobless rate remains below the national rate of 9.1%. The uptick, reported Friday by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, is worth noting since Texas Gov. Rick Perry has based his presidential campaign on his state’s ability to create jobs while much of the country is stuck in the economic doldrums.
Mr. Perry’s campaign blamed President Barack Obama. “Texas is not immune to the effects of the national recession,” Mr. Perry’s spokesman, Mark Miner, said in an email. “And even during this national economic downturn, which the president’s misguided policies have only worsened, Texas remains the nation’s top economy.”
That’s neat spin, but Texas’s economic record is the pillar holding his entire campaign up. If it starts to crack as the race wears on, his chances could collapse. Especially given the other electability concerns. Late poll tonight, just out as I write this: Perry 23, Romney 16, Gingrich 7, Bachmann 7.
Update: Yet another liability: Did Perry support TARP? The AP covered the letter [dated October 1, 2008 and co-signed by the RGA and DGA] with the headline, “Governors, Business Up Pressure for Bailout Bill.” It’s very hard to read otherwise.
“We strongly urge Congress to leave partisanship at the door and pass an economic recovery package,” they wrote. “It is time for Washington, D.C. to step up, be responsible, an do what’s in the best interest of American taxpayers and our economy.”
Perry, later that day, released a statement that seemed aimed at countering the impression left by his letter without clarifying what he was calling for: “[G]overnment should not be in the business of using taxpayer dollars to bail out corporate America. Congress needs to take off its partisan gloves and work together to bring both short and long term stability to the credit markets….”
Perry maintained in the 2010 primary that he hadn’t supported the bailout, something his spokesman Mark Miner reiterated to me today.
He opposed a “bail out” but publicly supported an “economic recovery package” on the day Congress passed TARP. Essentially, he punted.
This is a poll, not a vote.
yep that’s a deal breaker.
R versus D - what a choice . Two card monte . One party . The F*** America Party .
Romney or Huntsman are the only ones that stand a chance against Obama IMO. Especially Huntsman, if you want guaranty win in 2012. Bashed and trashed night and day, but whatever...the establishment has it’s finger on the pulse of the American people and I don’t see anything that that is going to change.
Not all women want strong, manly men - far too many prefer the effeminate, ineffectual, sniveling, metrosexual types.
In other words, far too many women, aren't real women at all, but a distorted product of the sick society we have created.
I've been trying for years to get people to read up on Paolo Friere. He's as hard-core left as you can find. His stuff is born from the African anti-colonialism brand of Marxism. Basically, they look at mis-educating the lumpenproletariat so they can be used to bring down capitalism through sheer havoc and ruin. This clears out the totalitarian's main adversaries (i.e., those with money and power), and thus leaves the statist in a more secure seat of power.
The more you read, the more you see it being played out in our schools today. The scary part is it seems to be working out according to plan.
STOP it with this CRAP of polls.
The election is 14 months away. Others might enter the race.
If Republicans fall for this re-play of the MEDIA CHOSEN McCain, and we wind up with a Romney who is a lesser form of Obama, we will get FOUR MORE YEARS OF OBAMA!
I just meant that some women may vote issues and not base it on looks. sheesh
Women across the country for sure aren’t interested in giving up social security or competing with immigrant labor for two or three minimum wage jobs to make ends meet any more than men. Even for a tall dark and handsome cowboy that gives a stemwinder of a speech and looks like he could kick up a little dirt. The good ladies of Texas don’t even appear to be that obtuse.
I agree, I think most women are practical when it comes to voting.
Right now voters aren't’ paying attention and the few signals they receive from planet politics give them an unflattering image of Republican candidates. That's going to change. Obama is a failure and failures don't get reelected, ever.
Many around here can't see the forest because they have their noses jammed into the wrinkles in the bark of a single trunk. Here's what you need to know about this election season: The successful, conservative, multi-term Governor of Texas will beat the much less successful, one-and-done, progressive, former Governor of Massachusetts who signed the prototype for Obamacare and midwifed “gay marriage.” The same successful, conservative Governor of Texas will crush the failed, left-wing President, or any surrogate the Democrats substitute in a desperate effort to avoid disaster.
Personalities are irrelevant. Debate performances are irrelevant. The finer points of policy relating to entitlements, spending, national security policy and especially immigration, are irrelevant. Que sera, sera.
The article says that 85% of Dems would still vote for Obama again. Pretty depressing. I don’t know what it would take to drive them away.
Like all of the major pollsters, Rasmussen wants to ingratiate himself with the inside the beltway crowd. They don’t like Perry so this poll makes them happy. Polls can generate any response a pollster wants if phrased the right way. I’ll remain skeptical of all polls until the real one in Nov. 2012.
LOL. Just in case anyone takes your post as being serious...
What might the unemployment rate in Texas be without Obama effing with the oil industry? The space program? Without the horrendous drought? Without the wildfires? Without the mess at the border?
Just a note that you'd further your cause a lot more by making substantive arguments rather than taking whiney little cheapshots that anyone with half a brain can see through. Kinda' makes you look like you've studied at the Debbie Wasserman Schultz School of Public Relations.
I knew that - I was just saying that thinking women might or might not use looks to make a decision was trivializing the real issue - the long-term emasculation of society.
Which only begs the question, what is his plan for the part of the country that doesn’t have oil, a space program, reliable illegal labor etc. for the vast majority of new jobs..
Remember this?
Now even Carville is rethinking his support---in the brouhaha of Obama's
scheduling his jobs speech on Repub debate night....Carville was quoted as
saying he would rather watch the debate---and he's not even a Repub.
Maybe we should be nice to Perry for a while. I hate kickin’ a guy when he’s down :-)
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.