Skip to comments.
Gallup Daily: Romney 26%, Gingrich 22%, Paul 13%, All Others In Single Digits
Gallup ^
| 2-4-2012
| Gallup
Posted on 01/04/2012 11:01:49 AM PST by TitansAFC
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-58 last
To: onyx
“Yes! I hope the New Hampshire Romney crowd doesnt boo Newt too badly, but I suspect they will, because Romney is their homey lib.”
By the time he’s done, they’ll be calling it Newt Hampshire!
To: TitansAFC
8% is a surge?
No. The results mean 8% is a lie. if you look at who is polled generally only 1/3 are republicans. They just do this to push their narrative. They are trying to manipulate the primary by pushing people to a ertain candidate.
To: katiedidit1
Santorum has been vetted by people paying attention.
Regardless of the leftist propaganda to the contrary, he is a consistent, principled, experienced, across the board conservative.
43
posted on
01/04/2012 1:33:58 PM PST
by
ohioWfan
(Proud Mom of a Bronze Star winner!)
To: TitansAFC
Herman Cain will be appearing on Hannity tonight at 9:30pm Eastern to make a special announcement!
44
posted on
01/04/2012 2:00:08 PM PST
by
Brown Deer
(Pray for 0bama. Psalm 109:8)
To: ohioWfan
No propaganda on the following: he along with Sen Hillary Clinton, Lieberman and Brownback supported a govt study to the tune of 90 million dollars to explore the effects watching tv has on children; he voted to raise the debt ceiling EIGHT times; Santorum voted to raise the minimum wage and to have the govt be allowed to set wage regulations; Santorum spent more than 1 billion on earmarks including..., Pennsylvania in 2005 received $483 million in earmarks for 872 projects, including $5.4 million for an igloo upgrade for an Army Depot and $5 million for a new visitor center at Gettysburg. and what most know about is his endorsement of Spector which he never apologized for...and his losing the senate seat in a landslide. I will say there is NO candidate running as socially conservative as Rick Santorum but he is NOT a fiscal conservative and our economy is in dire straits.
45
posted on
01/04/2012 2:45:11 PM PST
by
katiedidit1
("This is one race of people for whom psychoanalysis is of no use whatsoever." the Irish)
To: TitansAFC
.
The Liberal News-Media (now joined by their The Usual E-RINO Suspects) will suffer an "epic fail" ...
as they DESPERATELY try to force a "faux disqualification" for Newt Gingrich in the upcoming Iowa Caucus and New Hampshire Primary.
I'm confident that Newt Gingrich will "decimate" Mitt Romney and Dr. Winkie (Ron Paul) in South Carolina and Florida ...
======================================
How many successful POTUS candidates have ever won the Iowa Caucus ?
In the last thirty-two (32) years ... only ONE Democrat (Obama in 2008) and ONE Republican (Bush-43 in 2000) have won BOTH the Iowa Caucus and the Presidential Election ...
Of course, that doesn't include "sitting" Presidents (Reagan, Clinton) who won Iowas on their way to a second term election ...
That presents odds of TWO (2) Iowa Caucus wins out of SIXTEEN (16) possible Presidential Election Candidates !
Equivalent to a Whopping twelve-point-five (12.5) percent success rate ...
How many successful POTUS candidates have ever won the New Hampshire Primary ?
In the last thirty-two (32) years ... only ONE Democrat (Carter in 1976) and TWO Republicans (Reagan-1980 and Bush-41 in 1988) have won BOTH the New Hampshire Primary and the Presidential Election ...
Of course, that doesn't include "sitting" Presidents (Reagan, Clinton) who won New Hampshire on their way to a second term election ...
That presents odds of THREE (3) New Hampshire wins out of FIFTEEN (15) possible Presidential Election Candidates !
Equivalent to a Whopping thirteen-three-three (13.33) percent success rate ...
======================================
THE IOWA CAUCUS -- Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:
Democrats:
January 3, 2008 Barack Obama (38%)
January 19, 2004 John Kerry (38%)
January 24, 2000 Al Gore (63%)
February 12, 1996 Bill Clinton (unopposed)
February 10, 1992 Tom Harkin (76%)
February 8, 1988 Dick Gephardt (31%)
February 20, 1984 Walter Mondale (49%)
January 21, 1980 Jimmy Carter (59%)
January 19, 1976 "Uncommitted" (37%)
January 24, 1972 "Uncommitted" (36%)
Republicans
2008 Mike Huckabee (34%)
2004 George W. Bush (unopposed)
2000 George W. Bush (41%)
1996 Bob Dole (26%)
1992 George H. W. Bush
1988 Bob Dole (37%)
1984 Ronald Reagan (unopposed)
1980 George H. W. Bush (32%)
1976 Gerald Ford and Ronald Reagan
======================================
THE NEW HAMPSHIRE PRIMARY -- Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:
Democrats:
2008 Senator Hillary Clinton
2004 Senator John Kerry
2000 Vice President Al Gore
1996 President Bill Clinton
1992 Senator Paul Tsongas
1988 Governor Michael Dukakis
1984 Senator Gary Hart
1980 President Jimmy Carter
1976 Governor Jimmy Carter
Republicans
2008 Senator John McCain
2004 President George W. Bush
2000 Senator John McCain
1996 Pat Buchanan
1992 President George H. W. Bush
1988 Vice President George H. W. Bush
1984 President Ronald Reagan
1980 Governor Ronald Reagan
1976 President Gerald R. Ford
======================================
.
To: Servant of the Cross
Servant,
You are not very perceptive. This is a national poll, not one from Iowa. the national poll is different because Iowans see the race up close and millions of dollars worth of ads have been bought to influence the vote. Get it?
Iowans saw millions of dollars of anti Newt ads that no one else has seen and they have been very effective. Also, the Iowa vote is very influential itself, so you will see the national Gallup poll change a lot by Friday.
47
posted on
01/04/2012 7:35:59 PM PST
by
Dave W
To: hosepipe
Gee, I don’t think the Republican Party wants a RINO, but the conservatives are splitting their vote. It’s very basic.
48
posted on
01/04/2012 7:40:10 PM PST
by
Dave W
To: Dave W
If they didn’t Romney would be toast.. HE AIN’T...
49
posted on
01/04/2012 7:52:45 PM PST
by
hosepipe
(This propaganda has been edited to include some fully orbed hyperbole...)
To: jpsb
Santorum is not surging. He pretty much lived in people's homes in Iowa, and nearly brought them coffee and the morning paper for over a month.
He blew most of his very small campaign Wad, in a desperate effort to get back up in the race. But like Huckabee in 2008, he appealed to a very narrow but strong evangelical caucus in Iowa. He will no longer find that kind of support in the rest of the Primaries.
Most of the country, also no longer gets their marching orders from the MSM like they still do in Iowa. Most voters will never watch a campaign ad, especially the kind that Romney and Paul ran against Newt in Iowa.
Another interesting thing, that Paul is doing well in most of the Liberal states. Must be those young Democrats, like the ones who came out for him in Iowa. I think that Paul won't get out of single digits from SC on. And after the Santorum hangover wears off, Newt will start climbing in the polls again, because Romney is such a plastic, phony manikin looking, creepy dude.
50
posted on
01/04/2012 7:55:10 PM PST
by
PSYCHO-FREEP
(If you come to a fork in the road, take it........)
To: PSYCHO-FREEP
"Santorum is not surging. He pretty much lived in people's homes in Iowa"That is how I see it too. Either Newt or Paul is fine with me. I see Newt if he goes rogue gaining support. I see Paul gaining if Newt fades. I do not see Romney winning. Perry is the wild card.
51
posted on
01/04/2012 8:07:20 PM PST
by
jpsb
To: TitansAFC
This Gallup thing is just meaningless. Always has been. The poll reflects the preferences of many non-voters, a disproportionate number of people in states that will vote for Obama anyway, a base of “name recognition” respondents, and so forth. It tells us nothing meaningful. There will never be a national vote to determine the Republican candidate, nor any way of ever proving the polling accurate inside any sort of margin of error. In fact, if you were Gallup you could just report any numbers you wanted and never have to account for any of it.
52
posted on
01/04/2012 8:51:19 PM PST
by
PaleoBob
To: TitansAFC
bump. Wait till SC, hopefully, RINO Romney will meet his doom.
53
posted on
01/04/2012 8:54:31 PM PST
by
nicmarlo
To: hosepipe
Obviously. Your observation has been made now since the start of the whole process - nothing new.
54
posted on
01/04/2012 10:21:06 PM PST
by
Dave W
To: PSYCHO-FREEP
Maybe, maybe not. The winner of the SC primary is usually the nominee - perhaps always. Give Santorum a few moments of sunshine for a change. Mock him all you want, but he hung in there and did the hard work that Newt did not do.
Nominations are usually over fairly quickly and the Iowa vote itself does provide lots of media coverage to Santorum which won't hurt, much as it did to the Huckster four years ago. In fact, the Huckster won quite a few states four years ago. But as long as Newt and Santorum and others are splitting the conservative vote, just acclimate yourself to the Republican nominee Romney.
55
posted on
01/04/2012 10:30:22 PM PST
by
Dave W
To: katiedidit1
I get so sick of people whining about every candidate they don't like. There is loads of stuff on every candidate that we could use if we wanted to demonize them. Grow up. Stop it. There are many many good arguments concerning Santorum about fiscal matters. Research it and post it, but I know you won’t.
56
posted on
01/04/2012 10:33:37 PM PST
by
Dave W
To: Dave W
How about Santorum joining forces with Hillary and Joe Lieberman, Sam Brownback to give 90 MILLION dollars of taxpayers money to study the effects watching tv has on children? how about his vote to raise the debt ceiling 8 times? the bridge to nowhere in Alaska? and some more lobbying ties that are not going to be in his favor. Why do you think the people of PA voted him out by a landslide? if you want a social conservative that is strong on moral issues...Santorum is your man. If you want a fiscal conservative that will turn our economy around...Newt is your man. Also, CAGW (citizens against govt waste) is one of the best taxpayer watch dog sites online...they are bipartisan and nail everyone on earmarks and pork spending. They have posted the info on the 90 million taxpayer dollars utilized to study the effects watching tv has on children and yes, Santorum was for it big time. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news..but all candidates need vetting before we jump on their bandwagon. It will hit the fan anyway...just be aware of it. I know of Newts baggage and I know of his great accomplishments..he is my man..period
57
posted on
01/05/2012 9:32:36 AM PST
by
katiedidit1
("This is one race of people for whom psychoanalysis is of no use whatsoever." the Irish)
To: TitansAFC; Gator113
It still sux
We cannot stay divided....newt and rick could make a deal
Newt/santorum
Newt promises to not run for second term and rick gets nod then to try for his own eight ball
58
posted on
01/07/2012 1:31:49 AM PST
by
wardaddy
(I fear we cannot beat Roger Ailes and beltway GOP)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-58 last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson