Posted on 11/23/2009 4:34:15 PM PST by Lou Budvis
Big caveat right off the bat: PPP is the same polling firm that predicted a Hoffman landslide in NY-23. But (a) they had Mitt’s favorables comparable with Huckabee’s earlier in the year, so it’s not like their data’s historically been screwy, and (b) this isn’t just a one-month snapshot but a trend dating back to July.
(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...
Romney and Huck need gone ASAP from any chance of being the nominee for the president.. these guys represent what is WRONG with the Republican party, and have no business being anywhere near the presidency.
I don’t believe Romney’s favorables were ever above 30%.
Remember how many times Romney stood up for us common folk while the Kenyan and his merry band of fascists in DC have been rolling over us the last few months???
********* sound of crickets ************
Romney is a scumbag go along to get along politician and I have no use for him
What, you judging romneycare? whats wrong with you?/s/
Romney could not even win reelection (and he wanted to).
When his term ended, Governor Mitt Romney slinked out of town as a disappointing loser, his approval rating was only 34% with 65% disapproval and he turned the office over to the Democrats.
People did not like the man.
Now?
NOW??
NOW???
I think PPP was right about Hoffman. It was a landslide if you don’t count fraud.
Mitt's always been politically clueless. Wither it's having his clock cleaned by the high school dropouts of the Massachusetts legislature, or being against Reagan when everyone was going for Reagan, or as now, sucking up to the RINO, big gov, big tax, elderly, out of touch GOP elites.
When Joseph Smith ran for president in 1844, a pamphlet expressing his views (“General Smith’s Views”) was distributed across the nation. Probably penned by Phelps, the New York Herald described the document as “a very remarkable and original document…a more curious and unique thing has probably not been published since the time of Mohamet…” The following are some of Joseph’s positions*; they are worth reading for their striking humanity alone, born, no doubt out of his own deprivations:
MORE --> http://bycommonconsent.com/2007/12/19/joseph-smiths-views/
I like the far a way, telescopic gaze. Just like Smith, scamming and stealing outright, but pointing off in the distance some fairy tail for the boobs. Then there is Prince Mitt, stealing going on in Boston/Mass such that you couldn’t step out on the street without getting knocked down by some hack, burdened with a heavy sack of looted state cash (not that Mitt ever saw anything, the dolt ).
The fact is that Mitt Romney personally, as in himself, as in alone, imposed gay marriage
by pissing upon the Massachusetts Constitution (the oldest in the USA; easy for a carpetbagger like Romney).
Romney imposed gay marriage by his fiat against the Mass. Constitution by using improper executive authority.
"While former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney claims he did everything possible to throttle homosexual marriage in his state – his campaign now saying he took "every conceivable step within the law to defend traditional marriage" – several constitutional experts say that just isn't so.
"What Romney did [was] he exercised illegal legislative authority," Herb Titus said of the governor's actions after the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court released its opinion in the Goodridge case in 2003. "He was bound by what? There was no order. There wasn't even any order to the Department of Public Health to do anything."
Titus, a Harvard law graduate, was founding dean of Pat Robertson's Regent University Law School. He also worked with former Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore, ...
Romney's aides have told WND that after four of the seven court members reinterpreted the definition of marriage, he believed he had no choice but to direct clerks and others to change state marriage forms and begin registering same-sex couples.
Some opponents contend that with those actions, Romney did no more or less than create the first homosexual marriages recognized in the nation. And Titus agrees."
"....But the court's decision conflicts with the constitutional philosophy of three co-equal branches of government: executive, legislative and judicial, Titus said. It also violates with the Massachusetts Constitution, which states: "The power of suspending the laws, or (suspending) the execution of the laws, ought never to be exercised but by the legislature..."
And it cannot even be derived from the opinion itself, asserts the pro-family activist group Mass Resistance, which says the decision did four things:
* First, it acknowledged that the current law does not permit same-sex marriage.
"The only reasonable explanation is that the Legislature did not intend that same-sex couples be licensed to marry. We conclude, as did the judge, that G.L. c. 207 may not be construed to permit same-sex couples to marry."
* Second, it said it is NOT striking down the marriage laws (among other things, the Massachusetts Constitution forbids a court to change laws)
"Here, no one argues that striking down the marriage laws is an appropriate form of relief."
* Third, it declared that not allowing same-sex marriages is a violation of the Massachusetts Constitution.
"We declare that barring an individual from the protections, benefits, and obligations of civil marriage solely because that person would marry a person of the same sex violates the Massachusetts Constitution."
* And fourth, given that the court is not changing any laws, the SJC gave the Legislature 180 days to "take such action as it may deem appropriate."
"We vacate the summary judgment for the department. We remand this case to the Superior Court for entry of judgment consistent with this opinion. Entry of judgment shall be stayed for 180 days to permit the Legislature to take such action as it may deem appropriate in light of this opinion."
After the Legislature did nothing during the 180 days, Romney then took action "on his own," the group said.
"Gov. Romney's legal counsel issued a directive to the Justices of the Peace that they must perform same-sex marriages when requested or 'face personal liability' or be fired," the group said."
When his term ended, Governor Mitt Romney slinked out of town as a disappointing loser, his approval rating was only 34% with 65% disapproval and he turned the office over to the Democrats.
People did not like the man.
Romney's ratings slipped that low because he didn't run for reelection. He started campaigning for the presidency and there was talk about him "bad mouthing" the state of Massachusetts, so naturally his poll numbers tanked. If you don't want us, voters thought, we don't want you either.
Right now the approval rating of Mitt's successor, Deval Patrick, are close to where Mitt's were when he left, and half the state -- a very Democratic state -- think Mitt was a better governor.
I'm not saying that I love Mitt or that I'd want him to be president. Like a lot of management guys, he has something of a tin ear where politics is concerned, and I don't think he'll get very far this time.
But there are a lot worse politicians out there (some of whom even I voted for), and I have to wonder how Mitt's critics stack up against him in character, abilities, and accomplishments.
This is from 2005, Romney did not stand a chance for reelection and four months later (after polls like these) he announced that he would not seek it.
Romney predicts ‘landslide’ reelection
Forecast with a catch: That’s if he runs again
By Michael Levenson, Globe Correspondent | August 27, 2005
Despite polls showing him trailing potential Democratic rivals, Governor Mitt Romney is confidently predicting that he would trounce the competition if he decides to run for reelection next year.
‘’Well, I win by a landslide in Massachusetts if I run for reelection. And that’s very possibly what I’m going to do,” Romney said in an interview with Chris Matthews that was televised nationally yesterday on the MSNBC political talk show ‘’Hardball.”
“The Globe survey of 503 adults, published Sunday, found that Reilly was backed by 51 percent of respondents, compared to 38 percent for Romney. In March, a Globe poll showed Reilly with 48 percent and Romney with 41 percent.
The poll also found that, when respondents were asked if Romney should be reelected, 30 percent said he should be reelected, and 51 percent said someone else should be elected.”
I come up with Romney at 46% approval in March 2006, not at all terrible for a Republican in an overwhelmingly Democratic state.
Voter opinion of Romney appears to have dropped since he announced he would not seek reelection, a step widely seen as preparation for a 2008 presidential campaign. His job approval rating was 46 percent, down from 51 percent in the August survey, while 47 percent disapprove of his performance, up from 42 percent. Still, Romney's personal popularity remains constant: 49 percent gave him a favorable rating, compared with 50 percent in August, and his unfavorable rating remaining at the 41 percent he received in the last survey. Source
It was after Mitt started campaigning for the Presidency that his approval rating dipped down into the thirties.
Depending on who you talk to Deval Patrick's approval rating is already in the thirties or lower. In a two way race only 32% of the voters would pick Patrick, and that would be lower if his Lieutenant Governor runs against him as an independent, at least according to one August 2009 report I've seen.
I don't see Romney as anything more than a half-full glass. If you want to call him half-empty, fine, but there are a lot worse politicians out there.
In April of 2005 Romney’s approval rating was 43%, Romney’s approval ratings were telling him the story, the polls matching him against opponents were telling him the same story, the man could not get reelected, by December 2005 he gave up the notion that he could get reelected and formally said that he would not seek it.
Mitt Romney left office disgraced and with 34% approval. In the Presidential primaries, Romney had it all, the money, the organization, the dedicated base, but he could not make people like him or trust him.
Presently Romney’s numbers among Republicans are plummeting and for no evident reason, yet it is the story of his political life as he approaches 17 years of constant running for office with little to show for it.
He wanted the legislature to override the court's decision with appropriate legislation, but they wouldn't act. Without their approval, the court would do what people expected it to since the 2003 ruling.
If I'd been Mitt I wouldn't have made the way easier for the court. That was a mistake, but it wouldn't be accurate to say that Mitt Romney imposed gay marriage on the state.
The responsibility was first with the courts, then with the state legislature, and only to a small degree, with Romney.
You're not from Massachusetts, are you? You don't know how people think here. Half the state would have voted for a dog or a donkey if it ran under the Democratic label. Which is pretty much what they did the last time.
But why "disgraced"? Bush left office with a 22% approval rating. Was he disgraced? Harry Truman's final approval rating was also 22% or 23%. He has people who think he was right and a great president. Depending on who you talk to Cheney left office with 29% or 13% approval. Disgraced?
Romney left the state disgraced, with 34% approval and unable to win reelection.
After being the fourth Republican Governor in a row, Mitt Romney and his 34% approval turned the office over to a Democrat for the first time in many administrations.
Over his very long political career that single term in office was his only victory and it ended badly, and it represents his entire governing history.
{Politicians have a sell-by date. And if you don’t actually hold office now and didn’t hold one for very long, that date approaches quicker.}
True. However, if you are out of office, the best thing you could do is be a media personality like Huckabee. The Huckster has effectively used Fox News to promote himself as a man of substance. As a result, the Huckster is the front runner in primary polls and does the best against Obama.
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.