Rasmussen Presidential Tracking Poll (Romney 48%, Obama 44%)

rasmussenreports.com ^ | April 13, 2012 | staff

[Hawthorn]

>> This guy isn’t going to be a graceful loser <<

Agreed. And after his inevitable loss, we’ll probably face vicious riots in Harlem, Watts, Detroit and other large urban black population centers — that is, if “Trayvon Martin riots” don’t destroy most of those cities first!

[no dems]

No different than the rules you set at your own front door.
______________________________________________________________

You are wrong, my friend. I don’t do a FReepathon to get people to help my my monthly mortgage and bills. If people pay to keep this website going, then they should have freedom of speech here. If someone is paying my house note, then they should be able to say what they want to say in “my” house.

[Hawthorn]

>> Either way, we get to the same deplorable destination <<

At least Romney can’t say that if he had a son, he’d look like Trayvon Martin. And at least Romney won’t have a beer on the White House lawn with Henry Louis Gates. And when her husband wins, at least Ann Romney won’t say it’s the first time she’s been proud of the USA. Good enough for me!

[dfwgator]

At least Romney can’t say that if he had a son, he’d look like Trayvon Martin. And at least Romney won’t have a beer on the White House lawn with Henry Louis Gates. And when her husband wins, at least Ann Romney won’t say it’s the first time she’s been proud of the USA. Good enough for me!

True, but those are at most nothing but symbolic gestures that amount to a fart in a windstorm, but the real damage will still be the same in the end.....and, like it or not, the vast majority of the population WILL consider Mitt to be a representative of Conservatism, even though we all here know that's bulsh. But Romney will destroy conservatism for good. At least with Obama, the Rats will own it, and we can regroup for 2016.

[katiedidit1]

Conservatives are NOT ready to wave the white flag and cede the nomination to Romney! Newt is still IN! The numbers are NOT with Mitt Posted by noprisoners49 (Diary) Friday, April 13th at 5:30PM EDT 56 Comments Recommenders: garfieldjl (Diary), dialove Mitt Romney must win over 60% of all remaining hard delegates to secure the GOP nomination. Surprised? 19 states still need to be heard from, and of those states 869 hard delegates are available at the state and district level (discounting the 37 total delegates available between Indiana and Arkansas, which have proportionality rules only a democrat could love). State and committee GOP delegates number about 69, which I’m throwing into my calculations as a given for Romney. Nevertheless, Romney still needs 663 delegates to reach that magic 1144 number. Can he do it? Of the 11,280,792 votes cast so far, Romney has accumulated 4,595,908 or only about 41%. Typically, Romney does not garner more than an average of 44% of the vote. Santorum averaged about 25% of the vote. Even if half of Santorum’s supporters vote for Mitt, this still does not give him the necessary 60+ % to secure the GOP nomination. [All data from http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/republican_vote_count.html].

[Hawthorn]

>> There was every reason to believe that Newt would pick up most of Santorum’s support <<

Earlier polls did not show that. Closer to a 50-50 split, if I recall correctly. Seems that a lot of religious conservatives would prefer a Mormon “family man” to a thrice-married Catholic “sin-no-more” convert.

[Windflier]

You are wrong, my friend. I don’t do a FReepathon to get people to help my my monthly mortgage and bills.

Your logic is flawed.

Every one of us provides a good or service to others to make a living. We do not give up our right to set the rules of our own houses when we accept payment from others for that service.

If you run a restaurant or similar establishment, you've got every right to throw out a paying customer, if they break the house rules.

[Hawthorn]

>> the real damage will still be the same in the end <<

I can’t agree:

1. If the Congress passes a bill to repeal Øbamacare, then Baraq would veto the bill. Romney would not.

2. Baraq wants to reduce our Navy to its lowest level since World War ONE. Romney wants to strengthen the Navy.

3. Baraq wants to reduce our nuclear arsenal to 200 warheads or less. Romney will keep it at around 600 to 800.

4. Baraq has already told Putin that he’ll give in to Russian demands if re-elected. Romney won’t, because he would want to be re-elected in 2016.

5. Baraq has already dissed Netanyahu umpteen times and gives every sign of abandonning Israel in the face of Iranian threats. Romney and Netanyahu are close friends, dating from their work years ago at the same firm in Boston, and Romney gives every sign of strong support for Israel.

6. Baraq is advised on SCOTUS appointments by Eric Holder. Romney is advised by Robert Bork.

7. Baraq is advised on foreign relations by Hilary Clinton. Romney is advised by John Bolton.

Sure, Romney is far from the best candidate the ‘Pubs could choose. He suffers from numerous flaws, and he’s absolutely terrible in some respects. I’d much prefer Paul Ryan, Mitch Daniels, Haley Barbour, Rick Perry or Rick Santorum.

But we gotta face it:

The next POTUS will be either Øbama or Romney. And there’s simply no way that Romney can be as bad as another four years of Baraq. Let’s be real. As another Freeper said recently, You don’t get to choose your own reality. It creates itself.

[no dems]

Please tell me where the Free Republic House Rules are posted so I can follow them. Can you give me a link as to where to find them?

[Hawthorn]

>> Rasmussen polls registered voters <<

Well, sure, he has to find "registered" voters first, to separate them from "all adults." But then he filters for likely voters. And his final results are always reported in terms of likely voters, whereas almost all other surveys use registered voters right up until a few weeks before the election -- at which point many of them switch from registered to likely.

Now the methods that Ras uses to filter out the "registered" and "likely" categories must be proprietary. I'm sure he doesn't want the competition to know how he achieves his results. But achieve them he does, and he clearly has the best long-run record for accuracy.

The above having been said, some member of the regular anti-Ras crowd (actually, just a handful) here on FR will probably pop up now and tell us how the current poll is just another instance of Rasmussen's trying to dupe us. Ho hum. What else is new?

[no dems]

Actually, if Romney is smart, he will consider Santorum as his VP choice!!!
________________________________________________________________________________________

Not sure that would be “smart”. Rick might not even be able to carry PA for the GOP Ticket. I firmly believe that is the main reason he left the race; polls showed him possibly losing his home State of PA to Romney. Also, he alienates more people than he would bring in. Rick is not good at speaking “off the cuff” and then has to spend days “explaining” that he really didn’t mean what he said. Now..........

......if Romney is smart, he’ll choose MARCO RUBIO as his VP choice. Rubio can cut into Obama’s Hispanic vote and he can carry Florida. Whoever wins FL, wins the White House. Rick is a nice guy, but he needs to move on with his life and get a real job in the Private Sector and support those 7 kids and his wife.

[Hawthorn]

Just go to the FR homepage, where you’ll find this near the bottom:

“Please enjoy our forum, but also please remember to use common courtesy when posting and refrain from posting personal attacks, profanity, vulgarity, threats, racial or religious bigotry, or any other materials offensive or otherwise inappropriate for a conservative family audience. . . .

“Free Republic is a site dedicated to the concerns of traditional grassroots conservative activists. We’re here to discuss and advance our conservative causes in a more or less liberal-free environment. We’re not here to debate liberals. We do not want our pages filled with their arrogant, obnoxious, repugnant bile. Liberals, usurpers, and other assorted malcontents are considered unwelcome trolls on FR and their accounts and or posts will be summarily dismissed at the convenience of the site administrators.”

[JLAGRAYFOX]

Rubio is just fine and peachy with me!!!

[Henry Hnyellar]

Who is making you read this thread?

I thought conservatives were self reliant and willing to exercise personal responsibility.

I other words, quit your whining. Just don’t read the thread and you’ll feel better.

[Windflier]

Please tell me where the Free Republic House Rules are posted so I can follow them. Can you give me a link as to where to find them?

Sure thing:

http://askville.amazon.com/give-directions-Hell/AnswerViewer.do?requestId=7204067

[lonevoice]

I will read whatever I feel like reading for reasons of my own choosing, over which you certainly do not have a vote, and about which your opinion counts for absolutely nothing. Go find someone else to annoy.

[Sola Veritas]

“I sincerely do hope Mitt Romney chooses a bonafide conservative like Santorum, Rubio, Jindal, Bachmann, etc. I believe such a team would win big time come November, 2012!!!”

IF a someone like Santorum took a VP slot, he would lose his credibility. Also, if Romney lost, which despite these momentary polls, he will....it destroys Santorum as a contender in 2016. A true conservative, and wise one, would not ally himself with Romney.

I don’t use profanity in reference to Romney. I call it like it is; he is an insidious evil. Obama is obviously evil, which in a way makes him less of a threat. Hidden evil is always worse than what is open and obvious. As a Christian, I do not use the term “evil” lightly. Romney is a dedicated member of a psuedo-Christian cult. That makes him an instrument of evil, but candy coated so it isn’t easy to recognize. Also, staying strictly in secular politics, his terrible records on the 2nd Ammendment, Abortion, Judicial Appointments, over reaching government are well documented. He is not conservative in any sense. So, the combination of psuedo-conservatism and psuedo-Christianity makes him totally unacceptable.

Some scream about the fracturing of the GOP. Blame Romney and Ron Paul for that. Paul is a libertarian whack job and Romney is a liberal “Fat Cat” “Country Club” “Northeastern Liberal.” Neither he nor Paul should ever have been on the ballot of the GOP.

Folks, my oposition to Romney isn’t about wanting “purity.” It is about wanting someone remotely acceptable. Romney is not remotely acceptable. Plus, it offends me that he hasn’t won the nomination, he bought it.

Now is Mr. Obama a disaster as POTUS? No doubt about that! The ONLY good thing about his election in 2008 was that a Black Man was now electable in America. Unfortunately, Mr. Obama has set back race relations in this country. His is indeed dangerous, but he serves to rally conservatives to elect conservatives to the House and Senate where they can keep him in check. Romney won’t have anyone to keep him in check. The GOP members of congress will be brow beaten to go along with whatever nonsense he comes up with to do. So, I don’t see him as a real alternative to Mr. Obama. In fact, he could very well make things worse for establishing a conservative America.

So, I won’t support him. I won’t support Mr. Obama either. I am supporting congressional conservatives I can support in the fall. We have a good GOP congresswoman in my district that got elected in 2010...she needs to be kept in office. We have a terrible Dem Senator that needs to be removed...I will help on that. Putting Mr. Romney in place of Mr. Obama just doesn’t strike me as worth doing.

[JLAGRAYFOX]

I support your right to choose your own course!!! I disagree with your logic. I am not a great lover of Mitt Romney at all!!! I believe in and I see mortal danger in our country if Obama is elected to a second term. Obama is another “Hitler” IMHO, because he is power driven only and will end our republic as we know it when he is unfettered by politics.

You may be willing to chance that there will be a free election in 2016. Knowing Obama the way I do and his mantra, I must do everything I can to insure his defeat, even if a blind monkey with one hand tied behind his back is running against him. The loss of freedom and liberty just to get even with Romney because this guy or that gal did not get the nomination is a poor excuse for putting our great country on the line!!! However, if that is your choice, I support your right to hold those feelings!!!

[Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears]

This is terrible news for Freepers who want to sit out and send a “message.”

We must find a way to suppress the Romney vote!

/sarcasm

[Sola Veritas]

“You may be willing to chance that there will be a free election in 2016.”

I have more faith in strength of our republic. You are being ruled entirely by fear...I understand it, but it is not based in reality. The biggest danger Mr. Obama poses are continued bad economic, foreign policy, and judicial appointments. However, I don’t believe Mr. Romney will ultimately be any better on any...except maybe the economy.

“The loss of freedom and liberty just to get even with Romney because this guy or that gal did not get the nomination is a poor excuse for putting our great country on the line!!!”

You are making several false assumptions. The first is that already addressed...you are using an assummed “reality” of your fear’s assumptions to justify your actions. That is a logical falacy called “circular reasoning.” Of course, we all (myself included) do this. However, to say I’m acting out of vengence that my “person” didn’t get the nomination is a falsehood, you are assuming what is not true again. I have NEVER had a hard core choice in this cycle. I “logically” concluded that Newt Gingrich was the most “balanced” of the candidates and voted for him in the primary. However, I would have settled for Santorum or several of the others that were conservative. My disdain for Romney is not based upon him winning. I have opposed Romney since the 2008 primaries when he ran then. I also strongly opposed Ron Paul this cycle because I abhor Libertarians. My strong opposition to Romney is based upon my values....not upon him winning a primary. Were I seeking “revenge” against anyone or thing it would be the GOPe that has ignored its conservative base year after year when we were the ones that kept the party afloat.

Sir, I don’t like people that “wrap themselves in the flag” but I will tell you I have served and am still serving in the defense of this country. Believe me, I would NEVER do anything to jepordize its security. So, when I tell you my “perception” is that Romney is just as dangerous if not more so, don’t question my motives. Obviously, you can question my judgement as I question yours. But, don’t dare accuse me of harming this country for you are out of line sir! My judgement is just as valid as yours. And frankly, I’m actually being more rational than those of you supporting Romney out of fear of Obama.

Like I keep pointing out to folks here on FR. This is Jim Robinson’s home. He owns it, it is his property. True, he needs support from those of us here, but his does not hold a gun to my head and extort money from me. Therefore, when I enter his house, I follow his rules. He has been clear that Romney support is not permitted here.

If you think that Mr. Romney is the great white hope that will save you from the “fill in the blank” Mr. Obama. Well, it seems to me, that on this forum, you should keep that to yourself. It is promoting Romney. If you don’t like it, go elsewhere. Strangely, I have seen posts where persons have said, “I have paid for the right to speak my mind.” Thus, implying that because they donated it gives them a right to not follow the rules. Well, like I said, Jim Robinson didn’t force you or me to give him a dime.