Rasmussen: Romney 50%, Obama 42%. Obama at -22%. 44% Approval

RasmussenReports ^ | 5/12/12 | Scott Rasmussen

[Liz]

"You 'n your lousy ideas. I oughta throw you off the ticket."

<

"You hadda suckup to a bunch of sicko perverts. And drag me
into it. The whole dam country is in Romney's pocket, going
Republican. "

"Me? I'm stuck with you....and a buncha queers sizing up my
***, trying to get my private phone number. Michelle is furious."

[stephenjohnbanker]

LOL!!

[Grampa Dave]

Wait until the latest cover of Newsweak gets emailed around, and posted on a thousand blogs and social nets:

[ScreamingFist]

So, you won’t see my comments around here.

Good riddance.....just shut up and go away.

[Aetius]

If Obama were white, his numbers would be even worse; much worse most likely.

I’m guessing a lot of moderate-suburbanite type voters have too much white guilt to turn against him like they would a similarly incompetent and failed white Democrat.

[Repeal 16-17]

I’m the sure the Liberal Messiah just loves that cover. I hope Newsweek doesn’t change it.

[Fishtalk]

I know another commenter remarked on the simple truth of your post and the rightness of it.

I mostly agree but let’s not forget this is a guy who held down a gay kid and cut off his beautiful blonde curls, the WAPO told me this.

NO WAIT! You don’t think they’re floating this kind of stuff just to take down that very image of normalcy your comment praised?

Nah. Sure the President of the U.S. is too important to engage in such smallness. And the Washington Post, the paper of Woodward and Bernstein would accept such a stupid story?

No way!

[Fishtalk]

I thought the law was specifically written so that the individual mandate is NOT severable from the main law. IE, if the mandate goes down, the whole law goes down.

Dems did it that way on purpose, just SO the mandate wouldn’t go down, that’s how important it is to them.

Been reading since law was passed it can’t be severed. At least I thought that was the jist of it.

[Repeal 16-17]

I thought the law was specifically written so that the individual mandate is NOT severable from the main law.

There was supposed to be a severability clause in the bill, but that was mistakenly left out of the bill. Thus, ObamaCare says nothing regarding severability. In that situation, courts presume the legislature intended severability.

That presumption is overcome if either (1) it is proven that the legislature intended the unconstitutional provision to be nonseverable or (2) the unconstitutional provision is seen as essential (the law can not reasonable function without it).

[Fishtalk]

There was supposed to be a severability clause in the bill, but that was mistakenly left out of the bill.

You've got to be kidding me. "Mistakenly" left out? All that hullabaloo about that health care bill and one of the most important parts of the bill they "mistakenly" left out?

I gotta bridge to sell anybody believes this. My guess is that they told all those concerned that the Supremes would overturn any mandate that the bill would allow the mandate to be severed and the health care system overhaul would still move forward.

Only somebody done went and "mistakenly" left it out, just doggone.

[Impy]

This a referendum on Obama. Unless he sticks his foot in his mouth Romney may as well be a potted plant.

[Tennessean4Bush]

If Romney manages to pull out a win, it will be entirely due to the the Anyone But Obama vote.

I admit I never would choose Romney except in a race against Obama. My prayer is that the GOP holds or adds to their advantage in the House and gets the Senate back and basically leads President Romney along a conservative road. Might be ridiculous but hopefully it will prove true.

[Political Junkie Too]

This is the initial run of my Rasmussen state-by-state Senate model.

The model begins with the final results of the last Class 1 election, and I will update those results with current Rasmussen state polls as they are published.

I'll begin by listing the states that have recent polls, and then list the states that are still within the margin-of- error.

Final 2010 Senate results were Republicans taking 47 seats, and Democrats caucusing 53 seats. My model begins here.

Below are the first round of state polls. The first number is the change in GOP result from the last poll (or seat election if no prior poll), and the second number is the separation from the Democrat candidate's result. "No Poll" means the state's last final election vote is within the default margin of error (4.5%). For incumbants, the seat will be considered safe until a new poll is taken.

Watch List:

• Arizona 1: -6% (R +17%) - waiting for primary results
• Florida 2: -2.1% (R -11%) - drops out of the margin of error
• Massachusetts 1: -6.9% (R +0%)
• Missouri 2: +1.7% (R +7%)
• Montana 2: +4.7% (R +10%) - drops out of the margin of error
• Nebraska 2: +18.9% (R +22%) - drops out of the margin of error
• Nevada 1: -4.4% (R +11%) - drops out of the margin of error
• New Mexico 1: +12.7% (R -4%)
• New York 1: No Poll (R -24%) - waiting for primary results
• Ohio 1: -2.8% (R -3%)
• Rhode Island 2: No Poll (R -7%)
• Tennessee 2: No Poll (R +2.7%)
• Virginia 2: -3.2% (R +1%)
• Wisconsin 2: +20.5% (R +12%) - drops out of the margin of error

Using the most recent Rasmussen polls, the results of 32,000 simulated elections are listed in the table below. The definitions of the columns are:

• "GOP Senate Seats P10” – the value where the probability of the actual number being lower is 10%.
• ”GOP Senate Seats EV” – the expected value (mean) or probability-weighted average of the simulation.
• ”GOP Senate Seats P90” – the value where the probability of the actual number being lower is 90%. Or, it is the value where the probability of the actual number being higher is 10%.
• ”Probability of 51” – The probability associated with value 51 (the Senate majority goal).
• ”GOP Gain” – The difference between the GOP EV and the current number of seats (47), rounded down.

Week	GOP Senate Seats P10	GOP Senate Seats EV	GOP Senate Seats P90	Probability of 51	GOP Gain
2010 Election	47	47	47	0.00%	0
11-May-12	50	51.24	52	77.01%	4

-PJ

[RonnG]

We know the type of judicial appointees Obama will appoint: in-your-face, unapolgetic leftists. He’s already appointed two but two or three more will seal the fate of this county for a decade or more.

That is a most disturbing certainty of four more years of this chraracter. This is on top of his Marxist economic leanings.

A SCOTUS comprised of (5) hard leftists for the next 10-15 years will be catastrophic for a country that leans center-right

Even should Romney replace Kennedy and Ginsburg with two moderates we might stand a snowball’s chance. Anything more is gravy, anything less is a disaster of the first order.

[stockpirate]

I think it may be time for us here at FR to move towards Romney.

[Conservative Vermont Vet]

To: NE Cons

I think it may be time for us here at FR to move towards Romney.

Oh my!

Is it too early to pop some corn?

You are a brave soul, friend and hope you have donned your flame-retardent jammies as I predict the handful of Hate-Romney/Mormons will soon be at your throat with their pathetic arguments that Mittens is 10 times more dangerous and a threat than Dear Leader, even though while there is ample evidence that the Community Agitator is actively working to destroy Capitalims, if not our Republic, and though there is not ONE shred of evidence to show that Romney has said or done anything to indicate he would do same, that makes no nevermind to those who are blinded by their hate.

Stay well, stay safe and God Bless.

Count me in as an Anyone but Obama acolyte.

[NE Cons]

Nice try... But you would be wrong

[NE Cons]

Excellent post!

[NE Cons]

Exactly... The hate here is unreal... And notice how they ping each other then attack you like rabid dogs... Severely twisted folks

[NE Cons]

Good analysts, but unless you’re using state polls that are all more recent, these stale polls don’t reflect reality....