April 12, 2011

Poll Watch: CNN/Opinion Research 2012 Republican Nomination Survey

Wow… Just wow…

CNN/Opinion Research 2012 Republican Nomination Survey

  • Donald Trump 19% [10%]
  • Mike Huckabee 19% [19%] {21%} (21%) [14%] {24%} (17%)
  • Sarah Palin 12% [12%] {19%} (14%) [18%] {15%} (18%)
  • Newt Gingrich 11% [14%] {10%} (12%) [15%] {14%} (8%)
  • Mitt Romney 11% [18%] {18%} (20%) [21%] {20%} (22%)
  • Ron Paul 7% [8%] {7%} (7%) [10%] {8%} (8%)
  • Michele Bachmann 5%
  • Mitch Daniels 3% [3%] {3%}
  • Tim Pawlenty 2% [3%] {3%} (3%) [3%] {2%} (5%)
  • Rick Santorum 2% [3%] {1%} (2%) [2%] {3%} (5%)
  • Haley Barbour 0% [1%] {3%} (3%) [3%] {1%} (1%)
  • Someone else (vol.) 3% [4%] {5%} (7%) [6%] {5%} (8%)
  • None/No one (vol.) 4% [3%] {4%} (4%) [0%] {5%} (2%)
  • No opinion 1% [2%] {2%} (6%) [4%] {1%} (3%)

Among Republicans

  • Mike Huckabee 24% [18%] {24%} (21%) [17%]
  • Donald Trump 15% [8%]
  • Newt Gingrich 14% [15%] {9%} (14%) [15%]
  • Sarah Palin 14% [14%] {17%} (16%) [21%]
  • Mitt Romney 9% [18%] {18%} (21%) [20%]
  • Michele Bachmann 8%
  • Ron Paul 5% [7%] {7%} (4%) [7%]
  • Mitch Daniels 2% [3%] {4%}
  • Tim Pawlenty 2% [4%] {4%} (3%) [2%]
  • Rick Santorum 1% [3%] {1%} (3%) [3%]
  • Haley Barbour 0% [2%] {6%} (3%) [3%]
  • Someone else (vol.) 1% [4%] {4%} (5%)
  • None/No one (vol.) 4% [4%] {3%} (2%)
  • No opinion 1% [2%] {1%} (6%)

Among Independents

  • Donald Trump 24% [13%]
  • Mitt Romney 13% [17%] {19%} (19%) [23%]
  • Mike Huckabee 13% [22%] {18%} (20%) [9%]
  • Sarah Palin 11% [7%] {22%} (11%) [12%]
  • Ron Paul 10% [11%] {8%} (11%) [14%]
  • Newt Gingrich 9% [14%] {13%} (9%) [14%]
  • Mitch Daniels 4% [4%] {2%}
  • Tim Pawlenty 3% [2%] {3%} (3%) [5%]
  • Michele Bachmann 2%
  • Rick Santorum 2% [2%] {1%} (1%) [2%]
  • Haley Barbour 0% [1%] {1%} (2%) [2%]
  • Someone else (vol.) 5% [4%] {5%} (10%)
  • None/No one (vol.) 5% [1%] {4%} (7%)
  • No opinion 1% [2%] {3%} (5%)

Among Men

  • Mike Huckabee 18% [21%] {18%} (21%) [11%]
  • Donald Trump 16% [9%]
  • Sarah Palin 12% [8%] {12%} (12%) [16%]
  • Newt Gingrich 11% [16%] {12%} (13%) [17%]
  • Mitt Romney 11% [15%] {20%} (23%) [23%]
  • Ron Paul 9% [10%] {10%} (9%) [13%]
  • Michele Bachmann 5%
  • Mitch Daniels 4% [4%] {5%}
  • Tim Pawlenty 3% [4%] {5%} (4%) [3%]
  • Rick Santorum 2% [2%] {1%} (2%) [2%]
  • Haley Barbour 0% [1%] {4%} (3%) [4%]

Among Women

  • Donald Trump 23% [10%]
  • Mike Huckabee 19% [17%] {24%} (20%) [18%]
  • Newt Gingrich 12% [12%] {9%} (9%) [13%]
  • Sarah Palin 12% [16%] {26%} (17%) [20%]
  • Mitt Romney 10% [20%] {17%} (17%) [19%]
  • Michele Bachmann 5%
  • Ron Paul 5% [7%] {5%} (4%) [6%]
  • Rick Santorum 1% [3%] {1%} (3%) [2%]
  • Tim Pawlenty 1% [3%] {2%} (2%) [4%]
  • Mitch Daniels 0% [2%] {1%}
  • Haley Barbour 0% [2%] {3%} (3%) [1%]

Who would be your second choice?

  • Mike Huckabee 16% [18%] {14%}
  • Mitt Romney 14% [15%] {18%}
  • Sarah Palin 13% [12%] {19%}
  • Donald Trump 13% [6%]
  • Newt Gingrich 12% [11%] {8%}
  • Ron Paul 9% [10%] {8%}
  • Mitch Daniels 4% [4%] {4%}
  • Tim Pawlenty 3% [4%] {5%}
  • Michele Bachmann 3%
  • Haley Barbour 2% [1%] {1%}
  • Rick Santorum 0% [3%] {3%}
  • Someone else (vol.) 3% [2%] {5%}
  • None/ No one (vol.) 4% [9%] {7%}
  • No opinion 2% [3%] {4%}

Regardless of who you support, please tell me whether you would or would not like to see each of the following people run for the Republican nomination for President:

Mike Huckabee

  • Would like to see run 72%
  • Would not like to see run 26%

Mitt Romney

  • Would like to see run 66%
  • Would not like to see run 28%

Donald Trump

  • Would like to see run 56%
  • Would not like to see run 43%

Sarah Palin

  • Would like to see run 53%
  • Would not like to see run 47%

Newt Gingrich

  • Would like to see run 51%
  • Would not like to see run 45%

Survey of 385 Republicans and Republican-leaning Independents, was conducted April 9-10, 2011. The margin of error is +/- 5 percentage points.  Results from the poll conducted March 11-13, 2011 are in square brackets.  Results from the poll conducted January 21-23, 2011 are in curly brackets.  Results from the poll conducted October 27-30, 2010 are in parentheses.  Results from the poll conducted August 6-10, 2010 are in square brackets. Results from the poll conducted April 9-11, 2010 are in curly brackets.  Results from the poll conducted March 19-21, 2010 are in parentheses.

Data compilation and analysis courtesy of The Argo Journal.

by @ 12:22 pm. Filed under Poll Watch
Trackback URL for this post:
http://race42016.com/2011/04/12/poll-watch-cnnopinion-research-2012-republican-nomination-survey-3/trackback/

282 Responses to “Poll Watch: CNN/Opinion Research 2012 Republican Nomination Survey”

  1. Jason Says:

    That’s hilarious. No way that poll is even close to reality.

  2. Matt C Says:

    This qualifies as the “whiskey tango foxtrot” poll of the month. :)

    Essentially, Trump draws 100% of his support from Gingrich and Romney. Interesting. If this poll is accurate (a big if!) then I will breathe a sigh of relief when Trump doesn’t go anywhere. Holy moly.

  3. Alvin Says:

    I have been confused as to why everyone thinks Trump would not take support away from Romney. My feeling would be that he would be more likely to take away support from Romney than any other candidate.

    But this is only one poll, not a large enough sample size to really know if that is playing out or not

  4. Matt "MWS" Says:

    What a crazy world.

    Other than showing that a) Mitt is the weakest frontrunner ever b) Palin is pretty much finished and c) Trump is in the middle of his 15 minutes, this poll doesn’t have a lot of bearing on our understanding of the race, since we knew all that stuff already.

  5. Matthew Newman Says:

    Uhm…who are all these independents and women who seem to adore Donald Trump. Weird.

  6. Alvin Says:

    Jason,

    Good luck spinning the next few polls, which eventually will have Trump leading. We are heading there…

  7. TEX Says:

    Ha,ha,ha,….ha,ha,ha….
    and more ha,ha,ha…

  8. Matt "MWS" Says:

    There is an important question lurking there, which could be vitally important.

    Who are those Trump people? This matters, because they will eventually have to go somewhere else. Are they Mitt Romney’s CEO loving types? Are they Sarah’s Birther types? Because whereever they are coming from, this is a sizable bloc of people registering disaffection with their other choices.

  9. Jerry Says:

    This poll is a total farce.. CNN at its best…..

  10. Booyeah Says:

    Good thing almost none of those people are running.

  11. TEX Says:

    Another worthless poll,but the joke is on corrupt,
    spineless GOP establishment and on squishy moderates
    on this site.

    LOL!!!

  12. RegularJoe Says:

    Trump needs to get lost.

  13. C4T (combovers for Trump) Says:

    It’s his hair stupid!

  14. Steven S Says:

    Bad news is that he isn’t taking support from Ron Paul. So now 1/4 of the Republican party are kooks.

  15. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    Turn out the lights, the parties over.. HUCKABOOM!

    Among Republicans

    •Mike Huckabee 24% [18%]
    •Donald Trump AKA Huck’s Stalking Horse 15% [8%]

    •Newt Gingrich 14% [15%]
    •Sarah Palin 14% [14%]
    •Mitt Romney 9% [18%]

  16. Alvin Says:

    Here comes the Romney crowd with the attempted spin job. The problem is that several polls have had Trump near the lead. His polling, however confusing, is real. And it is dangerous to the GOP. But stop pretending like he is not a threat, because he is.

  17. CF Says:

    This poll is flawed. Look at the difference in the samples between the March 11-13 poll and this one.

    Mar 11-13: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/4106135/CNN_3_11_13.PNG

    April 9-10: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/4106135/CNN_4_9_10.PNG

    THEY DID NOT POLL URBAN OR RURAL IN THIS POLL.

    They also did not poll West, Northeast, or East in EITHER Poll. This poll is pure BS.

  18. CF Says:

    If anything, this poll takes support from Huckabee, as Trump does the best in the South. If we do not get results from the rest of the country, we cannot measure how well all candidates do nationally.

  19. Jason Says:

    @6: I don’t need to spin the polls. Polls aren’t worth a penny at this stage in the race. Go look at the polls in April of 2007. They mean NOTHING right now. The fact that Craig for Huck and everyone else here gets so worked up about them is amusing. Trump is a joke.

  20. TEX Says:

    The joke is on you Matt and some others.

    Sarah Palin is #3,ahead of Mitt and Gingrich,and you
    are screaming wishful thinking:”Sarah is finished”.

    PDS is getting to you.

  21. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    •Mitt Romney 11% [18%] {18%} (20%) [21%] {20%} (22%)

    Next stop, SINGLE DIGITS for Willard! ;)

  22. Smack1968 Says:

    Well that’s it!

    Because of this poll Nick Ayers is writing his letter of resignation after being on the job for 1 day. I’m tearing up my TEA-PAW signs, and we in the TPAW camp have started drinking even more heavily in Iowa.

  23. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    Rombots who are complaining once again,

    Little Cheese with that Whine?

  24. Matt "MWS" Says:

    Alvin,

    “His polling, however confusing, is real. And it is dangerous to the GOP.”

    I agree with that. I don’t think Trump has any chance of winning a nomination, BUT his polling is saying something real. I think there is a lot of disaffection there, and Trump is tapping it.

  25. DaveG Says:

    Dude.

  26. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    Smacks,

    Put down the bottle. ;)

    Time to contribute your terrific enthusiastic energy over on to the Huck camp.

    Just click on my name and welcome aboard, my friend.

  27. Matt "MWS" Says:

    Tex,

    Sarah has 100% name ID, and has shed about 80% of her support since Nov. ’08. People don’t just have casual opinions of her, they have strong opinions, and strong opnions are easily reversed. She isn’t going to get a second honeymoon, and Republicans are not going to vote for a candidate who runs 15 points worse in the general than the rest of the field.

    Simple as that. It’s over for Sarah.

  28. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    On Matt C’s “Gingrich thread” two down, I laid out the brilliant plans of Huck and Trump, imho.

    They agree on the issues of most importance to Trump (and it appears to millions of Americans, too) other than the birther deal.

  29. Jason Says:

    The meltdown of Craig when Huck officially says he is not in is going to be epic. I wonder if he will still troll every post on this site?

  30. CraigS Says:

    If Trump runs as an independent…it is all over for the GOP no matter who the candidate is. It will be Ross Perot all over again…crazy candidate with lots of money. Who will replace Admiral Stockdale on the Trump ticket ? How about Gen. McCrystal ?
    CraigS

  31. TEX Says:

    “I think there is a lot of disaffection there, and Trump is tapping it”.
    =========================

    Waking up from coma,finally?

    LOL!!!

  32. Sean Says:

    *Yawn* Are you guys really going to beat up on other GOP candidates for a year or so?

  33. Matt "MWS" Says:

    CF,

    N/A does not mean they didn’t poll those regions/demographics. It means the subsample wasn’t large enough to post meaningful numbers specific to that subsample.

    For instance, if a poll in MS polls 500 people, they may have polled 50 Catholics, since there aren’t that many Catholics in MS. Under that subsample, they would have N/A since their aren’t enough Catholics in the poll to make a meaningful determination of who Catholics are supporting.

    So this CNN poll is meaningful on a national level, but not meaningful as far as each subsample. But that doesn’t mean those areas weren’t polled.

  34. Ben Says:

    Craig –

    Can you dispute the demographics of this poll? They are numbers from the south only where Mitt fans admit he is not as strong – but in the generals he would only need to be better than Obama. Can you get CNN to do one for the North, Midwest, and West so that we can get a better feel for the country? Those are the parts of the country where we need the candidate to do well in.

  35. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    “Regardless of who you support, please tell me whether you would or would not like to see each of the following people run for the Republican nomination for President:”

    Mike Huckabee

    •Would like to see run 72%

    Agreement among that many is a rare thing in politics. And pleasant. Listen to our Party!

  36. CraigS Says:

    I also note in this ” poll ” that Romney’s favorability numbers; i.e, the percentage who want him to run, have risen significantly since his numbers began to ” fall ” More people want him to run so they can vote against him. What a curious little poll

    CraigS

  37. Matt "MWS" Says:

    Tex,

    Why isn’t Sarah tapping it? Where has all of her support gone? If I lost all my support to Donald Trump, I’d be pretty damn embarrassed. I sure wouldn’t be laughing at other people.

  38. TEX Says:

    “Simple as that. It’s over for Sarah”.
    =========================

    PDS is like cancer.

  39. Steven S Says:

    So we are going to take CNN’s poll over Fox News and NBC?

    Fox News: Huckabee 15, Romney 14, Palin 12, Trump 11, Gingrich 7
    NBC/WSJ: Romney 21 (same), Huckabee 17, Trump 17, Gingrich 11, Palin 10

    So who are we to believe in these polls? Trump takes from Huckabee, Trump takes from Romney, or just everbody trying to make Trump the news story of the month. The latter is the one I choose.

  40. Liz Says:

    You KNOW the dems want a TRUMP/Huckabee ticket. They’re salivating. For obvious reasons.

  41. Jason Says:

    MWS: Huh? If the numbers polled in those regions weren’t big enough to report, how can you say it was a representative poll? That doesn’t make any sense.

  42. Kavon W. Nikrad Says:

    The most compelling question to me is whether The Donald can capture lightening in a bottle and turn a vanity run into a fully-functional Perot 2.0 campaign inside or outside of the Republican Party structure.

    The hordes have assembled with torches and pitchforks, just like in 1992. Can Trump harness and channel this into something real? I am not sure. But if he can? Dude… Those of us who are old enough to remember the 1992 campaign know what that means.

  43. CF Says:

    Matt -

    What you’re saying is that they did not POLL ENOUGH people in the N/A regions. It is still flawed since they CHOOSE not to poll enough people in those geographic regions. That was either by accident or by design – and I suspect it was the latter.

  44. Jason Says:

    Exactly 39 – CNN is trying to drive ratings. The idea that Trump could be the Republican nominee is a joke. I worry about people that actually think that is a possibility.

  45. Steven S Says:

    The poll I think is the nearest results is FOX News.

  46. Matt "MWS" Says:

    Jason,

    Not every subsample has to be meaningful on a stand alone basis for the whole to be meaningful.

    For instance, you could have a national poll of 2000 likely voters. That’s huge, and meaningful. But it might only contain 1 or 2 respondents from McLean County, IL. That’s not meaningful for McLean County. So we could draw conclusions on the race at the national level from such a poll, but not about McLean County.

    Does that make sense?

    No poll could grab a meaningful number of every conceivable subsample. It doesn’t mean that subsample wasn’t proportionally represented in the whole, though.

  47. Matt "MWS" Says:

    Jason,

    “The idea that Trump could be the Republican nominee is a joke.”

    Yes, it is. But that doesn’t mean he isn’t leading a poll.

  48. Steven S Says:

    The next national PPP poll will be a doozy. Here is probably what it will be:

    Trump 24, Huckabee 14, Palin 12, Romney 11, Gingrich 10, Paul 6, Bachmann 5, Pawlenty 4

  49. Matt "MWS" Says:

    Ben,

    “They are numbers from the south”

    Not true. It’s just that only the South had a large enough subsample (being the largest single region) to have subsample numbers meaningful enough to publish, but even those would have an enormous MoE.

    See #33 and #46 for further explanation.

  50. Smack1968 Says:

    Craig,

    I was being sarcastic.

    Just get Hucks ass up here in Iowa, and soon.

    Don’t want to hear any excuses from you when TPAW wipes the floor with him in Iowa , TPAW Country!

  51. Kavon W. Nikrad Says:

    I worry about people that actually think that is a possibility.

    I worry more about him dumping 1.5 billion dollars into a 3rd Party run. People laughed at Perot at first too. But the point is that it was never really about Perot. It was about tens of millions of Americans who hated the two choices they were given and opted out. I think that Trump knows that many people are feeling exactly the same way in 2012 as they did back then and knows he can exploit it.

  52. TEX Says:

    “Why isn’t Sarah tapping it”?
    ===============================

    You don’t know?Geez,it’s so clear and you don’t see it.
    Sarah Palin is not going after Obama’s birth certificate,and The Donald IS,both barrels.

    And lot of people love it,not that they care where Obama was born,they don’t want squishy milqetoasts.

    Sarah Palin will get those votes the moment she announces and goes her campaign style,going ferociously
    after Barack.

  53. Steven S Says:

    And the rollercoaster ride continues:

    Pennsylvania:
    Romney 43, Obama 42
    Obama 45, Huckabee 44
    Obama 45, Santorum 43
    Obama 47, Gingrich 39
    Obama 50, Palin 39

    Favorables:
    Huckabee 37/43
    Santorum 37/47
    Romney 31/41
    Gingrich 25/54
    Palin 33/61

  54. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    Steven,

    Huck has now won (with one tie today) 9 of the last 12 polls!

    It is what it is, my friend.

    All 2012 Republican Presidential Nomination Polling Data

    REAL CLEAR POLITICS Average 3/8 – 4/10

    Huckabee Romney Trump Palin Gingrich Paul Bachmann Pawlenty Daniels Santorum Spread

    18.0 16.5 15.7 12.5 10.7 6.6 4.3 3.8 3.2 2.2 Huck +1.5

    CNN 4/9 – 4/10 19 11 19 12 11 7 5 2 3 2 Tie Huckabee/Trump
    FOX News 4/3 – 4/5 15 14 11 12 7 3 2 4 3 2 Huckabee +1
    NBC/WSJ 3/31 – 4/4 17 21 17 10 11 — 5 6 — 3 Romney +4
    Gallup 3/18 – 3/22 19 15 — 12 10 6 5 3 4 2 Huckabee +4
    CNN 3/11 – 3/13 19 18 10 12 14 8 — 3 3 3 Huckabee +1
    Pew Research 3/8 – 3/14 20 21 — 13 11 8 — 3 2 2 Romney +1
    PPP (D) 3/10 – 3/13 18 17 — 16 14 9 — 5 4 — Huckabee +1
    NBC/WSJ 2/24 – 2/28 25 21 — 12 13 6 — 3 3 2 Huckabee +4
    Gallup 2/18 – 2/20 18 16 — 16 9 5 4 3 3 2 Huckabee +2
    Newsweek/DB 2/12 – 2/15 18 19 8 10 7 — – 5 1 — Romney +1
    PPP (D) 2/11 – 2/13 20 17 — 15 12 8 — 4 4 — Huckabee +3
    CNN 1/21 – 1/23 21 18 — 19 10 7 — 3 3 1 Huckabee +2

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/republican_presidential_nomination-1452.html

  55. Matt "MWS" Says:

    Tex,

    “Sarah Palin is not going after Obama’s birth certificate…”

    That’s because she’s a squishy milquetoast RINO. :-)

    “Sarah Palin will get those votes the moment she announces and goes her campaign style,going ferociously after Barack.”

    You think Sarah’s going to hammer the Birther theme?

  56. Liz Says:

    The dems pick the craziest nut candidates and try to craft a story that the American public is screaming that this odd couple be elected. This poll gives you the first indication of who this narrative is going to involve.

  57. TEX Says:

    LOL!!!

    Sarahcuda will hammer Obama on his deeds,destruction of
    the country,

    Nobody can do better,not even close!

  58. Franklin Says:

    Palin has name recognition but that does not mean that she is known. If she decides to run then she will have a chance to either change or confirm people’s opinions just like she did in Long Island. Palin runs around 5% behind other candidates not 15%. If Palin is so dead then why are Republicans using Bachmann as a stalking horse?

    I do think this poll shows there is room for an outsider and who that outsider will be is open to question.

  59. Ben Says:

    Matt –

    I get subsampling and polling and statistics – but for an entire region to be N/A means that the poll was heavily weighted towards the south as that is the only region that had statistics that were not listed as N/A.

    Your analysis using a county and it’s relevance is valid. But we are talking about entire regions. Sorry, but something is fishy if you are not willing to see this as a skewed poll.

  60. Steven S Says:

    Since the beginning of March, Huckabee has stayed below 20%. Thats not good for a presumptive nominee. Game is wide open.

  61. Liz Says:

    Huck has already said he’d be pleased to run with Trump. Shocked, anyone?

    Shouldn’t be. The problem with Huck is he can’t balance a checkbook and he is lazy when it comes to fundraising. Trump solves that problem.

    Problem with Trump is he has no political clout or credibility with evangelicals. Huckabee fills that gap.

    Match made in the backroom of a casino.

  62. Ben Says:

    Matt – @#55

    That is probably the first time I have ever seen somebody tag Palin as a RINO – do you feel good throwing around that title at anybody other than Huckabee?

  63. Liz Says:

    Palin is fabulous. And believe me, she is known. Problem is, she has a special needs baby. Toddler now. I wouldn’t vote her away from that.

  64. TEX Says:

    Liz,

    You wouldn’t vote for Sarah Palin,kids or no kids.
    No need to lie.

  65. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    Pennsylvania’s newest poll..

    Favorables:

    Palin 33/61

    ===

    Oh my goodness.

  66. Liz Says:

    TEX, I can appreciate your cynicism. I would vote for her if she had no children. If there were no one better running. I identify with her quite closely.

  67. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    Pennsylvania:

    Romney 43 Obama 42
    Huckabee 44 Obama 45
    Santorum 43 Obama 45

    ===

    And the White House goes into panic mode! ;)

  68. Liz Says:

    Matter of fact, I would very possibly put in for president this cycle if I had no children. That’s how important I think this round is. I hope we can all stay focused.
    PALIN/LIZ

    awesome

  69. Ben Says:

    Craig – where are the PA numbers from. I’d like to look those poll #s over in detail. Thanks,

  70. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    “I would vote for her if she had no children” – Liz aka ?

    ===

    Have we ever had a president with no children?

  71. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    Ben,

    Kavon, the owner of this site will post them in a new thread.

  72. Ben Says:

    you have an in with the owner?? I smell rat. :P

  73. Liz Says:

    Thankfully, there are still some gentlemen out there who don’t think women should have to do EVERYTHING, and they actually take it upon themselves to run for positions of leadership. But you know and I know, if the need is there and no one steps up…..PLENTY of qualified ladies out there willing to strap the baby on her back and kick butts.

    Or get hubby to quit his career and hobbies and commit to doing a first class mothering job. That’s where Palin failed, in my mind. Hubby should have stayed home and covered for Mom, who was obviously going places. There was a child-rearing gap, and the kids struggle. I think that goes to the judgment and management or prioritizing skill set.

  74. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    Here’s some twitter teases from PPP..

    ppppolls

    The Hillary primary voters are the big concern for Obama in PA now- will they stay on board?
    6 minutes ago via web

    What would bail Obama out in Pennsylvania- Gingrich who he leads by 8 or Palin who he leads by 11
    7 minutes ago via web

    If GOP ends up with stronger nominee than current top tier things could get real scary for Obama in PA
    8 minutes ago via web

    Huckabee, Romney, Santorum close with Obama in PA even though they themselves are not popular
    9 minutes ago via web

    Obama’s national approval with Dems is 81% but in PA it’s only 68%10 minutes ago via web

    Obama’s main problem in Pennsylvania is white Democrats- only 64% approval with them
    11 minutes ago via web

    After 10 pt victory in PA in 2008, Obama now down 1 to Romney, up 1 on Huckabee, up 2 on Santorum:
    12 minutes ago via web

  75. Liz Says:

    Romney has a pristing child-rearing record. And he clearly treats his wife well. That’s the first thing I look at. That’s why an Al Gore, who’s wife had to visit the loony bin a couple of times, and Edwards, who basically kicked his wife when she was so very down, don’t even qualify for a position of leadership in my mind. Period. Gingrich is out. Trump treats wives badly, but does OK by his kids. Still, it’s insufficient character in my mind.

  76. Adam X Says:

    Romney’s down to 11 just as he announces his candidacy. Donald Trump has no “street cred” at all among the GOP base – yet they are FAR more enthused about his candidacy than Romney’s.

    Pretend that Trump’s name was actually “Not Mitt Romney.” Essentially that’s what his potential candidacy means. The fact that someone like Trump can tease a run and sap half of Mitt’s support tells you everything you need to know about how soft Mitt’s support is.

    Mitt’s in real trouble. The base is rejecting him.

  77. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    Ben,

    Here’s my go-to map on how I think it will go in 2012 for us conservative Republicans over the liberal Obama..

    http://mjosephsheppardrecoveringliberal.files.wordpress.com/2010/11/snipmap.jpg

    Duh, winning! :)

  78. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    76.

    BINGO, Adam!

  79. Liz Says:

    I vote for Trump in all the polls. Not now I won’t because real leadership has stepped up.

  80. Liz Says:

    TRUMP/HUCKABEE 2012
    The colors should be purple and orange.

    (just kidding!)

  81. Steven S Says:

    When the next poll has Huckabee behind Trump, will Craig slam the poll? We’ll find out in the next few days.

  82. Steven S Says:

    I guess Trump is Fred Thompson at this time in 2007.

  83. Ben Says:

    Craig –

    Not a bad look. I think the same look adding in NV and NH and now potentially PA would be what it would/could look like for Romney as well.

  84. Steven S Says:

    Rasmussen Reports Poll
    June 18-21, 2007 Fred Thompson 27%, Rudy Giuliani 23%, Mitt Romney 12%, John McCain 11%, Mike Huckabee 3%, Other (vol.) 7%, Not sure 17%

    USA Today/Gallup Poll June 11-14, 2007
    Rudy Giuliani 28%, Fred Thompson 19%, John McCain 18%, Mitt Romney 7%, Newt Gingrich 7%, Mike Huckabee 3%,

    A little earlier this time around

  85. Liz Says:

    The Casino king and Preacher in Chief combine. Think it’ll happen? Who gets the top of the ticket?

  86. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    Can Romney take back his announcement yesterday? Aaaand pull his new youTube campaign videos very quietly off the internet?

  87. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    Just say it was campaign glitch and Willard will announce this summer or fall when things looks a little better in the polls and focus groups.

  88. Liz Says:

    I really don’t care as long as they clear up this birth certificate issue.

  89. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    81.Steven S Says:
    April 12th, 2011 at 1:37 pm
    “When the next poll has Huckabee behind Trump, will Craig slam the poll? We’ll find out in the next few days.”

    I love all polls averaged at Real Clear Politics, Pollster.com, and PollTracker! You know that by now.

    Huck/Kasich 2012 :)

  90. Liz Says:

    Craig for Trump ‘n Huck, I admit I was surprised at how low key Mitt Romney’s entry into the race was. Taken aback, maybe. Where were the fireworks? The styrofoam pillars? No Mussolini-like affectations? Strange. But I trust the guy. Less is more sometimes.

  91. Freddy Ardanza Says:

    I’d say this is ridicolous but this is the same party that had Christine O’Donnel, Joke Miller and Sharon Angle as nominee.

  92. Steven S Says:

    I’d say leading Obama by 5 in Florida, leading the GOP primary by 5 in Florida and 6 in Michigan, leading New Hampshire and Nevada, squeaking out a narrow victory in the blue state of Pennsylvania, one national poll up 4 against Trump and Huckabee, another poll in 2nd place. I’m content with all these polls coming out. Still waiting for the first debate.

  93. Liz Says:

    The study in contrasts with Huck and Trump will be striking. Trump’s wife of the day next to salt of the earth Mrs. Huckabee. Something for everyone there.

  94. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    82.Steven S Says:
    April 12th, 2011 at 1:38 pm
    “I guess Trump is Fred Thompson at this time in 2007.”

    Exactly 1000%. Except Huck is good friends with Donny and they’re working together.

    But enemies with Freddy who was working with McCain.

  95. Liz Says:

    Mitt’s budget for his coming out video must have been $2.99 or less.

    But then again, that’s what I like about the guy.

  96. Liz Says:

    Remember the big fat WINK Huck gave McCain in the debate when they did the Kowalski Krunch on Romney? That was rich. Huckster was in on the joke then, wasn’t he baby. He and McCain were best buddies back in the day. At least in Huck’s mind.

  97. Adam X Says:

    92,

    You’re spinning. Mitt is statistically tied among Republicans with MICHELE BACHMANN.

    This is not where he needs to be. Not even close.

  98. Steven S Says:

    We still don’t know if Huckabee runs or not. I still believe he gets in. Only thing me and Craig agree.

  99. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    90.Liz Says:
    April 12th, 2011 at 1:52 pm
    “Less is more sometimes.”

    As this poll clearly points out for Willard.

  100. Liz Says:

    Casinos are kind of…temples, in a way. There’s a certain religious discipline to gambling. Huck could make that argument. Think the two will pair up?

  101. Steven S Says:

    One poll and its over. Time to go home. Not worth fighting, NOT!

  102. Liz Says:

    Steven thinks the majority of voters in Florida want more Obama? Wow. I must be outta touch then.

  103. Matt "MWS" Says:

    Ben,

    “I get subsampling and polling and statistics – but for an entire region to be N/A means that the poll was heavily weighted towards the south as that is the only region that had statistics that were not listed as N/A.”

    Not at all. The poll is only 385 people. The South- being the largest single region- probably has a subsample barely above a reportable threshold.

  104. Adam X Says:

    I don’t think Trump is serious about this. I’m more interested in how his potential candidacy affects the numbers of the more likely candidates.

  105. Matt "MWS" Says:

    Ben,

    “That is probably the first time I have ever seen somebody tag Palin as a RINO – do you feel good throwing around that title at anybody other than Huckabee?”

    It was the only time I have in quite a long time. It was satirical, and for Tex, who uses it every other sentence.

  106. Adam X Says:

    Ben,

    MWS is right. In a national poll it’s only natural that the sample is weighted more heavily to the south. That’s where a disproportionate share of our voters would be.

  107. Steven S Says:

    I’m confused about the Florida response. We have two candidates winning there just from the latest poll which could be an outlier, or maybe the PPP poll with Romney down 2, Huckabee 7, or maybee its Huckabee up 2 on Romney or maybe Romney up 5 on Huckabee, or maybe a three way tie, or maybe Gingrich leads without Palin and Huckabee or maybe Gingrich is up one without Huckabee, or maybe….

    You get the drift. Same goes with national polls.

  108. Liz Says:

    This cycle is ripe for the picking. Conservatives have to get to the kernel of this fast, or we become our own worst enemy. Huck and Palin aren’t running. Or if they are, it’s poorly planned. Huck could ride the financial coattails of Trump, it’s true. But I don’t respect that, I doubt many Americans would. Palin could come roaring from behind late in the game. I would respect that depending on other factors at the time. But face it, we have Cain, Pawlenty, Romney, and Elena Kagan or someone at this point in time. This isn’t even a race. Romney takes up all the air in the leadership vacuum at this point. So drop Trump, like I did, because at this stage it’s obviously Romney.

  109. Liz Says:

    Oh…Bachmann. I really like her. But not for POTUS. No executive experience and we are seeing what that does to someone in a position of leadership even as we speak.

  110. Liz Says:

    Bachmann did throw in already, right? Formally?

  111. Adam X Says:

    If Trump can show up out of nowhere and magically become “Mr. Conservative Republican who can actually communicate effectively against Obama” – and at the same time make his Mittness fall to 11 – then someone else can too.

    It’s wide open. Completely wide open. Just like with the Democrats in 1991.

  112. Steven S Says:

    Looking at this poll, I just don’t see Rick Santorum ahead of Pawlenty.

  113. Liz Says:

    By the way, Bachmann e-mails me just about every other day. I like that personal contact. She makes me feel important and keeps me informed. I could start to appreciate that more as the cycle goes on. So far nothing from Romney – oh, except for a very concise note from Spencer Zwick who I know is a sharp young tactician telling me how much a small donation would be appreciated early in the game. We see eye to eye on that point.

  114. Liz Says:

    Not a thing from Trump. Not even a robo call from Huckabee. I haven’t seen Cain or Pawlenty for weeks.

    Romney is the only game in town right now.

  115. Steven S Says:

    Correction: Pawlenty at 2%, the same as Santorum.

  116. Ben Says:

    Adam –

    Are you saying that the regions other than the south are irrelevant and we don’t need to know how they line up with the candidates? The demographics and the data reporting related to the poll are poor at best and misleading at worst.

  117. Adam X Says:

    114,

    Romney is the only game in town right now.

    Sure. So doesn’t concern you a bit that despite that, he’s below double digits among Republicans?

    I mean if this guy is the only game in town and Republicans REALLY want to beat Obama, then why are they so indifferent to Romney’s candidacy? And indifferent is certainly a fair word, given his name recognition and lack of support.

  118. Liz Says:

    I need to be courted. As do Americans everywhere. We’ve had a lot of crap laid on us in the past coupla years, and we are not taking things at face value anymore. Trump has shafted(that’s a vulgar term, isn’t it?) Trump has backhanded a few ladies that trusted him in his lifetime. He’s gotta resolve that with me before I would get behind his program. Obama has been a complete and total louse. He doesn’t call, he doesn’t write, he just parties, vacations, and sends me the bill. A real cad.

    Romney is the only decent program going thus far. I hope he doesn’t disappoint.

  119. Liz Says:

    Adam X – A very very fair inquiry.

    I would make the same inquiry. Thus my effort to not so gently persuade here, the hard core junkies, to get behind the obvious. Why don’t you? Is it still the hair? The dog incident? What is it?

  120. CF Says:

    Adam X – See my #17 post.

    This poll is NOT representative among republicans across the nation. Their sampling was primarily in the South and Sub-Urban.

  121. Adam X Says:

    116,

    No – I’m saying that STATISTICALLY the South matters MORE because MORE Republican voters live there.

    A news outfit could take a national poll of 1000 US registered voters of a hypothetical election between a Mr. Blue Jackassterson (D) and Mr. Red Corporatekissinger (R) and include NO Republicans from any of Maine, Vermont, Rhode Island, or Delaware in the sample – and still be a perfectly statistically sound poll.

  122. CF Says:

    In other words, Trump pulls EVEN with Huckabee in the SOUTH AND SUB-URBAN. This is far worse news for Huckabee than it is for Romney.

  123. Liz Says:

    Why the snide resentment towards Romney? It’s prevalent. I’ll be honest. I think lot’s of you suffer from the same malady circulating in the Beltway – you hate to be ridiculed. And the MSM and left-owned culture is ridiculing anything conservative, anything competent, anything Romney. For obvious reasons.

    I urge everyone to get some backbone and quit trying to appease. I’m feeling enough pain, economic and otherwise, that I don’t CARE what Chris Matthews thinks of my values. I don’t care if he hates Romney for being a Mormon. I don’t care. I just want competence, integrity, and a J-O-B. Get to this point. It’s liberating.

  124. mac Says:

    51. Kavon you are painfully aware of the following six words: Senator Al Franken; Gov Jesse Ventura. Folks, MN has for decades led the nation in standardized test scores and yet they elect morons to high office. If it can happen in MN it can happen nationally.

  125. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    blockquote
    Meanwhile, Huckabee has been holding a string of about a half-dozen meetings with donors or bundlers in New York. primarily from the finance industry, over the past 6 weeks, three sources told POLITICO.

    It’s the first indication that Huckabee has been making any sort of move toward one of the factors he said would go into a decision about a second-chance presidential campaign in 2012 — raising enough funds to be competitive in the primary.

    FULL ARTICLE: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0411/53006.html

    Sweet.

    Could this be some of the financial crowd that agreed with Huckabee about the bailouts like Cavuto and Ramsey friends?

  126. Liz Says:

    CF you don’t see a merger between Trump and Huck? It seems so right in a terrible way. It could happen. I hope Huck proves the possibility oh so wrong.

  127. Adam X Says:

    120,

    All that tells is is that when you look at EACH INDIVIDUAL subgroup – the margin of error is too high to be meaningful. It says nothing about what happens when you combine these small individual subgroups.

    When you combine the individual subgroups, the data becomes statistically sound. It may seem strange – but that’s how statistical samples work.

  128. Liz Says:

    Craig I hope he can raise a boatload. If he operates in the red again, that’s unacceptable in this political climate. He better get a crate o’ cash.

  129. Liz Says:

    ..or show he took a course in money management.

  130. Adam X Says:

    Why don’t you? Is it still the hair? The dog incident? What is it?

    It’s simple. It’s the fact that I suspect that RomneyCare is a deal breaker to Republicans. I suspect that the base of the GOP won’t accept his story on why he did it, they won’t care what Massachusetts voters think of it – and will never support any candidate that touches the issue.

    Call it unfair. Call it whatever you want. But that is my genuine feeling about the issue and Romney’s attachment (for better or worse) to it at the hip.

    I don’t want to go into a general election with a candidate that can’t garner enthusiastic support from the base because he has a position completely at odds with what they want.

  131. Ben Says:

    Adam – there are 4 groups – we aren’t looking for individual cities or even states. there are 4 regional groups – why is their data N/A? Either they weren’t polled or there weren’t enough of them polled or the pollsters didn’t want to show those demographics.

    They are not a small statistical subgroup for sampling purposes.

  132. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    Liz Says:
    April 12th, 2011 at 2:17 pm
    “Craig I hope he can raise a boatload.”

    LOL! I bet you do! :)!

  133. CF Says:

    #127 -

    No, it tells us that CNN’s SAMPLE SIZE in the N/A subgroups was so insignificant that they did not apply it toward the poll as a whole. In other words, their sampling in the South and Sub-Urban areas was much, much greater.

    A poor sampling requires you to throw out your data because the MOE is too high. If they HAD sampled each region equally, the MOE would be equal among them all. THAT IS WHY THIS POLL IS FLAWED – THEY DELIBERATELY LOWERED THEIR SAMPLING in Romney’s strongest regions to make him look diminished.

  134. FiscalConservative Says:

    125.Craig for Huck in ’12 Says:
    April 12th, 2011 at 2:15 pm
    blockquote
    Meanwhile, Huckabee has been holding a string of about a half-dozen meetings with donors or bundlers in New York. primarily from the finance industry, over the past 6 weeks, three sources told POLITICO.

    It’s the first indication that Huckabee has been making any sort of move toward one of the factors he said would go into a decision about a second-chance presidential campaign in 2012 — raising enough funds to be competitive in the primary.

    FULL ARTICLE: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0411/53006.html

    Sweet.

    Could this be some of the financial crowd that agreed with Huckabee about the bailouts like Cavuto and Ramsey friends?

    —————

    :party

    Huckabee seems to be the one running circles around everyone. He is befriending Trump to do a Fred Thompson on Romney and raising money.

    He also seems to be rekindling his old friendship with Barbour.

    Sounds like me Huckabee has made up his mind. He will be running.

  135. letmeeatmywaffle Says:

    At this rate Trump will be the nominee; he won’t need to run as an indy. Seriously, who can compete with his personality and media drive. Answer: no one in the current field, maybe not even Christie.

  136. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    Money management? Huck got by far the most bang out of his bucks in ’08! Second in delegates to our nominee dispite being out spent 12 to 1, baby!

    Romney wasted about 100 mil on third place and t-shirts that said “who let the dogs out?”

  137. FiscalConservative Says:

    CF in #122,

    I dont see how this puts Huckabee in any negetive light. You are whistling past the graveyard if you don’t see Romney’s 7 point drop to 11 points alarming.

  138. CF Says:

    Trump is an “all in” or an “all out” candidate. If Obama produces a valid birth certificate, people will admit Trump was being a phony and throw him out. On the other hand, if Obama cannot produce a birth certificate, Trump will be hailed as an American Hero and will win the Nomination.

  139. FiscalConservative Says:

    How can one be seen as a frontrunner with almost half of the leader?

  140. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    •Haley Barbour 0% [1%] {3%} (3%) [3%] {1%} (1%)

    FC,

    Speaking of Haley Barbour. ;)

    I’m sure his money guys have put a hold on those checks by now.

  141. CF Says:

    #137 -

    Compare the two polls (I posted links at #17) that CNN did. Notice that the prior one included the URBAN region. The URBAN region was not included in the sample this time.

    Add back in the URBAN region and you get completely different results. You all are the ones whistling past the graveyard when you ignore missing STATISTICAL DATA.

    IT IS most detrimental to Mike Huckabee because the Trump and Huckabee poll even there (21% to 19%).

  142. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    ..just sign ‘em over to the Huck campaign fund in care of Donald Trump, Campaign Treasurer. :)

  143. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    So if Trump bows out, publicly enthusiastically supports Huck, and manages his funds..

    Huck shoots up to about 40% overnight.

    Boom!

  144. Ben Says:

    I would hope that Trump doesn’t make Huckabee’s campaign into one of his multiple bankruptcies with nothing to show for it. Sorry Craig – had to take a fun jab at you for that one.

  145. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    That’s ok, Ben :)

    All I know is he’s got billions NOW!

    Bam!

  146. Adam X Says:

    133,

    That’s the way polling works. When the national poll is based on 385 Republicans the margin of error is +/- 5 percent. The numbers are absent outside of the south because you’re right – the sampling size is too small in other regions to be determinative within that region. But, assuming the poll was conducted correctly, as more N/A groups are added together, the overall data balances out correctly.

    There is no anti-Mitt conspiracy here.

    So now, PPP is biased against Romney AND CNN? Ok…

  147. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    Hey,

    It is The American Dream. Pull yourself up to about three billion in cash after you go bankrupt.

    It’s not like Trump was born rich or anything ;)

  148. Ben Says:

    “the sampling size is too small in other regions to be determinative within that region”

    There you go – you cannot determine how any of the other 3 regions fare for the candidates because their data is so small and insignificant that it cannot be considered relevant.

    I’m not crying foul here Adam – I just don’t think it is telling the complete story and you helped me prove that point.

    I have not had a chance to look at PPP’s demographics before I looked over the CNN one today. I will have to do that.

  149. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    Adam,

    I’m so used to this for years. Simply whenever Mitt trails, it’s that darn pollster!!!

    Same with the Palinites. Only 10x worse. At least Rombots have some type of brain.

  150. Ben Says:

    Oh it isn’t an entire bankruptcy – that’s the beauty of having LLCs all over the place – they are frequently used to protect assets and so it is just a number of various “projects” that he has filed bankruptcy on. Like I said – just hope that under your dream circumstance he wouldn’t do the same to Huckabee’s campaign. ;)

  151. Ben Says:

    Craig – did you just say I have “some type of brain”?

    What a sweet term of endearment. :D

  152. Matt "MWS" Says:

    CF,

    “If they HAD sampled each region equally, the MOE would be equal among them all. THAT IS WHY THIS POLL IS FLAWED”

    No. Polling each region equally would be flawed, because the regions are not equally populous.

  153. Liz Says:

    I accept the need for Romneycare in Massachusetts. What is it at, 85% approval there? I thought it was the dems that wanted to force everyone to live they way they want to. Mass wanted it, 98% of the legislature backed it, and Romney delivered in a constitutional, non-public option way. He is a can-do politician and he listens to the will of the people he serves.

    Now, if Romneycare makes you shriek and runaway, I can see why you would be fearful. You have been abused before. Obamacare makes us all shudder. But if you hand Obamacare around Romney’s neck, you are a useful tool for Axelrod and friends. And you do not understand federalism. Which is common, nowadays.

    Reach deep. See if there isn’t a way you can reconcile your opinions with the workings of a free society. States will differ. And differences are GOOOOOD. It’s a type of diversity. What does Romney call them? State workshops or something? We get to see what works and what doesn’t. Massachusetts works. They have the highest education scores. Their poverty level is manageable. Michigan, California, and New York, oh, and Illinois don’t work. People are leaving in droves. You can frame the entire election around the federalism issue. But I find Romney’s understanding and argument of the virtues of our system rock solid. And he operates within the Constitution.

    He’s not perfect. But he’s perfect for this point in time, in this nation. Who else you got? Who else has the skills?

  154. Adam X Says:

    148,

    There you go – you cannot determine how any of the other 3 regions fare for the candidates because their data is so small and insignificant that it cannot be considered relevant.

    Listen to your argument. That’s the REALITY of polling. What you just said is why there are margins of error included in polling data all of the time.

    It’s mathematics, man. Even though you cannot get a workable margin of error for each of the regions individually, that does NOT mean that when you combine the data it doesn’t paint an accurate portrayal of the race. It has to – otherwise we’d NEVER get accurate polling data.

  155. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    Well, we’re counting on Huck’s pal, Huntsman and/or his dad’s funds as well.

    Perhaps Romney will chip in $2500 after Florida, too.. (c;

  156. Liz Says:

    TrumpHuckabeePalinPawlentyBarbourPaul….who else are you going to throw in with? There is no one else, right now.

  157. teledude Says:

    I’ve been gone all day…but I have to tell you guys what is really going on .

    Trump is a Hillary Clinton stalking horse. I can’t believe some of the people on our side.

    The guy is NO republican and sure as hell NO conservative. He is playing games, and the beneficiary will be Hillary.

    He’s trying to take out Obama, opening up 2012 for Hillary. Then he will run as an independent to split the Republican vote (turning his wrath on the republican nominee)so Hillary can WIN. He is on record as a huge Hillary friend and supporter.

    Remember Ross Perot? This is Clinton SOP.

    They don’t run unless they can fix it.

    Get ready for President Clinton version 3.0.

  158. Alvin Says:

    Let’s see a few more polls before we annoint Trump. I am intrigued by the contention that Trump will pull from Huckabee more so than Romeny. I doubt it, and am interested to see how the numbers play out.

    Also, Smack, love the Pawlenty posts! Keep up the good work!

  159. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    iz Says:
    April 12th, 2011 at 2:46 pm
    “I accept the need for Romneycare in Massachusetts. What is it at, 85% approval there?”

    Ummm….no. Not even close. There was a new poll out just last week.

    Yep, you guessed it. They hate it, too.

  160. Liz Says:

    Huntsman is tight with Huckabee? I should have known. Huntsman is one squirrelly dude. Now, if you are in with Huck, suggest he go with Huntsman over Trump. He gets the cash either way…..but chances are better with a Mormon on the ticket. Wait – wouldn’t that be a problem for Huck? You’re teasing me. No way they are friends.

    Besides, Senior has the money. And he backs Romney. Junior dropped out and hung with dopers – it skips a generation sad but true.

  161. Liz Says:

    159 well what are the numbers? Don’t be shy.

  162. Liz Says:

    teledude is freaking me out.

  163. Ben Says:

    Adam –

    The candidates have to win primaries and general elections in the other regions other than the south too – so perhaps they should poll enough people in those other regions so that the MOE would not be so skewed so that it would be N/A kind of info. You can’t get an honest feeling for the entire country by polling 1 of 4 regions so heavily. The south does not speak for the West or the North or the midwest. It’s math “man”.

  164. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    Liz,

    Google is your friend. Embrace.

    Massachusetts poll: 38% think RomneyCare is working, 49% think it …Apr 7, 2011 … Rigged though this poll may be, it still puts the lie to assertions by some here that Romneycare is “Wildly popular” in Mass. …
    hotair.com/…/massachusetts-poll-38-think-romneycare-is-working-49-think- it-isnt/ – Cached

  165. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    Liz,

    Knock off the religion card. It won’t work for ya. Sorry.

  166. Ben Says:

    I guess to me it is insulting to see N/A on any of the regions. Why not tell me the % breakdown for each region and show the MOE for each? Let me determine if it is N/A or not.

  167. Adam X Says:

    163,

    The south does not speak for the West or the North or the midwest. It’s math “man”.

    No one is saying that they do. What the poll says, probably correctly, is that when you combine the South with the west, with the northeast, with the Midwest – you get the results listed at the top of the page.

    Plus or minus five percent.

  168. Ben Says:

    Craig – did you ever find a link to the poll data for that one from last week?

  169. Jason Says:

    ABC/WaPo Poll – April 15, 2007

    Who is in the lead? Rudy Guiliani:

    Guliani 33%
    McCain 21&
    Romney 9%
    Thompson 9%
    Gingrich 6%
    Tommy Thompson 2%
    Huckabee 1%

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/polls/postpoll_041607.html

    THESE POLLS MEAN NOTHING!!! I don’t understand why people get so worked up over them.

  170. Matt "MWS" Says:

    CF,

    “The URBAN region was not included in the sample this time.”

    Yes….. it was. It just wasn’t large enough to include its numbers as a seperate subsample. For the love of Pete, why is this so hard to understand?

    N/A in the subsample does not mean those responses were thrown out!!!

    Good golly, why is it always Rombots and Palindrones that can grasp this crap?

  171. Jason Says:

    Same poll as in 169:

    Clinton 45%
    Obama 22%
    Edwards 13%
    Gore 5%
    Biden 1%

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/polls/postpoll_041607.html

  172. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    My linker button on my keyboard apparently is not working. Try this one..

    http://hotair.com/headlines/archives/2011/04/07/massachusetts-poll-38-think-romneycare-is-working-49-think-it-isnt/

  173. Ben Says:

    Adam –

    like I said – I am not disputing their culmination of data or how they got it. I am trying to say I would like to know – by region – how each candidate did (including a MOE for each region) and then you can show me the overall column with the weighted averages (which is what the overall one is showing).

    Put it into perspective – if Mitt wins 15+ states from the West and North while only a few people in those regions were polled and Mike/Trump win 15+ states from the South and Midwest where most of the people were polled from it does not show the true results of regional support and overall potential for electorate support. It is skewed.

  174. Matt "MWS" Says:

    Ben,

    “so perhaps they should poll enough people in those other regions so that the MOE would not be so skewed so that it would be N/A kind of info.”

    Sometimes they do. This one didn’t. When you start your own polling company you can poll at least 100 people in every precinct in the country if you like, that way you can break it down to the county and township level. Hell, you could probably give us an accurte depiction of where lefthanded, red headed lesbians between the ages of 45-54 stand.

  175. Bob Hovic Says:

    If they proportionalized their sample based on population, then the sample for each region and resulting MoE would be:

    South – 142 (8.2)
    West – 90 (10.3)
    Midwest – 84 (10.7)
    East – 69 (11.8)

    Apparently they consider an MoE of greater than 10 to be worthless to report (with good reason).

    CF: “If they HAD sampled each region equally, the MOE would be equal among them all.”

    To make all MoE’s the same they would have to oversample the other regions, which would throw off the national totals. Since the national totals are their primary interest, they didn’t do that. They could also have taken a much larger (e.g., over 1000) total sample, but that would have cost more and taken longer.

    The national numbers are valid — whether you like them or not. It’s generally a good idea to treat subsamples with considerable skepticism, even in larger polls.

  176. CF Says:

    #170

    “Yes….. it was. It just wasn’t large enough to include its numbers as a seperate subsample.”

    You realized you just contradicted yourself in that sentence don’t you? It WAS INCLUDED, but it WASN’T INCLUDED????

  177. mac Says:

    Did anyone see 124? TRUMP COULD WIN. He has 3 billion dollars and 100 percent name ID

  178. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    Huckabee 1%

    ====

    Thank goodness it’s not 2007 then 8)

    We’ve come a long way, baby!!! We took a lot of heat all over the internet for that precious 1%.

    Some called us dreamers. ;)

  179. Ben Says:

    “The URBAN region was not included in the sample this time.”

    Yes….. it was. It just wasn’t large enough to include its numbers as a seperate subsample. For the love of Pete, why is this so hard to understand?

    N/A in the subsample does not mean those responses were thrown out!!!

    Good golly, why is it always Rombots and Palindrones that can grasp this crap?”

    N/A – not applicable – aka irrelevant or not important enough – that is what I have been saying Matt – it wasn’t large enough so the data / region is skewed so you cannot see an accurate reading for each individual region and how the candidate fares in them.

    Geez Louise – why can’t the Huckabee fans figure this out. :P

  180. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    Rombots used much stronger words.

  181. Ben Says:

    My goodness Matt – let’s not get cynical – I am not talking about towns, counties, or even states – I am talking about 3 other regions. Not too difficult.

  182. Liz Says:

    Craig by your own kind admission, the poll is flawed. Believe me, the Mass libs LIKE IT.

    #133, precisely the idea. Diminish Romney, promote TRUMP/HUCK. It’s been done before. I’ll bet Soros throws in behind TRUMP/HUCK if he hasn’t already. Guarantee you Soros doesn’t buy Romney. He ALWAYS buys into a knowing or unknowing dupe on the Republican side. He’s got to cover his bases. Make sure we don’t accidentally elect a competent conservative. Devil grampa that he is.

  183. Liz Says:

    Remember the despair in having to choose McCain or Soetero? Didn’t you ask yourself, how come there are no good candidates this cycle? That’s not an accident. Can’t happen again.

  184. Liz Says:

    180+ is too much. But it was very therapeutic.

  185. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    177.mac Says:
    April 12th, 2011 at 3:02 pm
    “TRUMP COULD WIN. He has 3 billion dollars and 100 percent name ID”

    ===

    Mac,

    Combine that with Huck’s and we’ve got $3,000,000,500!!!

    (..using my inner Twain)

  186. Liz Says:

    Nope. Huck owes $3 million on his Florida house. Trump can cover it though.

  187. Liz Says:

    besides, Trump could lose all his money in one divorce gone bad. Could happen.

  188. Adam X Says:

    Also using Bob Hovic’s data – it shows that the poll was EXACTLY correct in its methodology.

    Look at this.

    South – 142 (8.2)
    West – 90 (10.3)
    Midwest – 84 (10.7)
    East – 69 (11.8)

    That means that of the 385 Republicans surveyed, 142 are from the South. That equals a sampling percentage from the south of 36.88 percent.

    Check out the actual numbers from the 2008 general election. A plurality of McCain support came from the south.

    Here’s the work:

    State-Number of McCain voters(millions)

    TX-4.47
    OK-0.96
    KS-0.70
    AR-0.64
    LA-1.15
    MS-0.72
    AL-1.27
    FL-4.05
    GA-2.05
    SC-1.03
    TN-1.48
    NC-2.13
    VA-1.73
    _________
    TOTAL SOUTH (millions of voters) – 22.38M
    McCain’s NATIONAL POPULAR VOTE – 59.95M

    McCain got 37.33 percent of his votes from the South in 2008. The poll’s southern sample is 36.88 percent. That’s good enough for government work, and even slightly UNDER REPRESENTS the south.

  189. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    Liz,

    We get it. ALL the polls Rombots hate are wrong.

  190. Matt "MWS" Says:

    CF,

    No, I didn’t contradict myself. I said those numbers were included in the national poll, the one you see at the top, but not included in the subsamples, because their weren’t enough of them to be worth reporting. See Bob’s comment #175.

    They didn’t toss out people who own Nissans either, but there wasn’t enough of them to include as a subsample.

    Get it????

  191. Adam X Says:

    I guess Huckabee’s supporters should major in miracles AND math. :)

  192. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    Liz,

    You have more conspiracy theories than Jesse Ventura and C4P put together. Your other friends ever tell you that?

  193. Jason Says:

    Besides, the MoE is a pretty high 5% on this one. Romney is still within the margin of error here. All this attention to polling is stupid, but if you are going to quote them so prevalently at least recognize what they say. They say that Romney can have support from anywhere between 6% and 16%. Huckabee and Trump could have support from anywhere between 14% and 24%. The poll says nothing about where reality is within those ranges. It is just as possible that Romney is ahead of Trump and Huckabee as he is behind them.

  194. Matt "MWS" Says:

    I give up. If somebody else wants to explain to Ben and CF how polling works, and loves beating his head against a wall, have at it……..

  195. Matt "MWS" Says:

    Jason,

    “It is just as possible that Romney is ahead of Trump and Huckabee as he is behind them.”

    It’s not just as possible, but it is possible.

  196. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    184.Liz Says:
    April 12th, 2011 at 3:09 pm
    “180+ is too much. But it was very therapeutic.”

    Ok we’re starting over numbers then. :)

  197. Ben Says:

    Funny Matt – I was about to say the same thing about you and Adam. LOL

  198. Jason Says:

    Statistics says nothing about where reality is within that range, so yes it is “just as possible”.

  199. Jason Says:

    Why don’t people stop wasting their time with these polls and go out and do something to convince people to vote for your guy. It has been shown many times here that these things have little to no impact on the final outcomes next spring. Boasting or lamenting poll positions at this point is completely stupid.

  200. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    Jason,

    Have you ever heard of Real Clear Politics?

    It’s more likely Huck is leading Mitt.

    But one is holdig their own a little better than the other.

    Just relax and enjoy math:

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/republican_presidential_nomination-1452.html

  201. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    *holding ;0

  202. Matt "MWS" Says:

    Jason,

    It’s a hobby or an interest. If you don’t share it, check back in when it’s meaningful to you.

  203. Stephen Hall Says:

    Sounds like Huckabee is gearing up for a run…

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0411/53006.html

  204. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    191.Adam X Says:
    April 12th, 2011 at 3:15 pm
    “I guess Huckabee’s supporters should major in miracles AND math.”

    ..and squirrel poppin’ and eatin’ ;)

    Now I’m getting hungry.

  205. Jason Says:

    It’s a worthless hobby or interest. There are so many other interesting aspects of politics to talk about. I don’t understand the harping on polls. To each his own though.

  206. Bob Hovic Says:

    I don’t understand why people go to so much trouble to discredit a poll that they don’t like. Instead of looking for fluky numbers in the subsamples, just use the confidence level. 5% of polls are flawed (meaning outside MoE), so just say “This must be one of the 5%” and move on.

    This won’t work for the Palin crowd, of course, but if it’s just an occasional bad poll, this is your best strategy for discrediting it and/or shoring up your own feelings.

    By the way, I prefer aggregating polls.

  207. Jason Says:

    Craig: Have you ever heard of 9 months away? Guiliani was leading the average poll at this time in the 2008 cycle. He was leading by a lot more than 1.5% too. A lot of good that did him.

  208. mac Says:

    185. ;o)

  209. Matt "MWS" Says:

    Jason,

    “It’s a worthless hobby or interest. There are so many other interesting aspects of politics to talk about. I don’t understand the harping on polls. To each his own though.”

    Then why do you continue to comment on this thread?

  210. Adam X Says:

    Well one thing this poll does do is call into question the meme that PPP is cooking its books to screw over Romney on purpose.

    I like aggregates too. This poll is corroborating the fact that Romney has some major deficiencies to overcome among the base before he has a real shot at the GOP nomination. And if Trump DOES run then Romney’s cash isn’t going to buy him a whole lot of insurance.

  211. Jason Says:

    Aggregating polls without flaws is smart. I think to get the most accurate results you have to throw out the outliers. I would classify this one as an outlier (it is probably flawed). If see a bunch of others with numbers like this it will be worth paying attention. But the main point is that none of this makes an ounce of difference right now. It says nothing about what will happen 9 months from now.

  212. Adam X Says:

    18,

    Jason didn’t think such things were worthless in 2008. I remember vividly about the “delegate count” being determinative. After Mitt lost Iowa the Rombot party line was that delegates mattered. Well if delegates mattered then then delegates matter now. And if they do, measuring a candidate’s support has a huge effect on how many delegats said candidate is going to rack up.

  213. Matt "MWS" Says:

    Jason,

    How many comments would you have to make about polls in order to be “harping on polls”?

    Just curious……

  214. Jason Says:

    Trump is not someone to waste money worrying about. In fact, no one should be worrying about any other candidate right now. The idea should be to establish a base of support, contrast yourself against Obama, raise a bunch of money, and come off as likable in the debates. The time to start worrying about other Republicans won’t be until October or November. I say bring on Huckabee, Palin, Trump, Newt, and Daniels. The earlier they get in, the earlier they will see how hard it is to really build up a campaign.

  215. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    Bob Hovic Says:
    April 12th, 2011 at 3:24 pm
    “I don’t understand why people go to so much trouble to discredit a poll that they don’t like.”

    Me neither when they could just go outside and enjoy the day like Jason. ;)

  216. Jason Says:

    MWS: I’m not harping on polls. I am harping on people harping on polls. ;)

  217. Jason Says:

    212: I have no idea what you are talking about. I wasn’t here in 2008.

  218. Adam X Says:

    You’re not Bonham? Well in that case I have you confused with another Jason.

  219. Greg Says:

    Thius is CNN trying to make the Republican Party look good. It was CNN that trumpeted McCain in the Primaries only to totally dismantle him when the general election came. CNN wants to promote the goofiest Republican. Trust me, there is an agenda at work here.

  220. Bob Hovic Says:

    “I think to get the most accurate results you have to throw out the outliers.”

    The problem is that one might be biased in defining ‘outlier’. Better to use them all and let the Law of Big Numbers deal with the outlier question.

  221. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    CNN is not a bad pollster. They used to have Romney up, I think.

    Here’s the rankings of companies..lots and lots of them -

    http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2010/06/pollster-ratings-v40-results.html

  222. Matt "MWS" Says:

    Bob,

    Outliers, by definition, are polls that make one’s preferred candidate look bad…….

  223. Bob Hovic Says:

    Craig (70): “Have we ever had a president with no children?”

    The best bet would be Buchanan, who was the only bachelor president and was widely believed to be gay.

  224. Jason Says:

    221: I think it is interesting that that system ranks Strategic Vision polls (who have been accused of fabrication) higher than CNN. I think it is pretty hard to determine whether a single poll is bad or good. I agree with Bob Hovic (and I’m assuming yourself) that aggregation is the best way to get accurate results.

  225. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    Bob,

    Yeah I was thinking their had to be at least one without any kids or even gay.

  226. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    *there

  227. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    33.

    Every poll, I mean EVERY poll we’ve had on the Race42012 site where Romney or Palin are slightly or more down has brought out the tin foil hat crowd. We’re used to it.

    It’s like having guest comedians on. 8)

  228. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    227.

    Make that for Jason ;)

  229. Heath Says:

    385!

    Why post joke polls like this?

  230. Matt "MWS" Says:

    James Polk and James Madison were also childless. But Polk wasn’t gay, he was Presbyterian, which Trump can tell you is part of the Protestant religion. :-)

  231. Ben Says:

    Wait a second Craig –

    Just a moment you were being kind by saying that I had “some kind of brain”. Were you just egging me on? Now I wear a tin foil hat?

  232. Matt "MWS" Says:

    Ben,

    It’s to protect that brain. We understand…..

  233. Ben Says:

    LOL – ah……knew you’d come through with some ‘splanin Matt. Gee shucks. ;)

  234. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    Huckabee’s ratings this weekend..

    http://forum.hucksarmy.com/download/file.php?id=1479

    More than the others combined!

  235. Matt "MWS" Says:

    I’m always here for ya’ Ben.

    Well, not always, but when I’m here, I’m here for you.

  236. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    Well, there is the tin foil helmet crowd, too. ;)

    And to be clear: Rombots have massive brains.

    Just ask one.

  237. Bobinator Says:

    This poll like Trump himself is intended to marginalize Republicans. CNN will pull all stops to make Trump the face of the Republican opposition to Obama.

  238. Bob Hovic Says:

    “James Polk and James Madison were also childless. But Polk wasn’t gay, he was Presbyterian, which Trump can tell you is part of the Protestant religion.”

    I gave Buchanan as the surest bet, because the odds were better against any children outside the marriage.

    I was unaware of the relationship between Presbyterians and Protestants, but as it is well-known that Protestants aren’t gay, I agree with you that makes it unlikely that Polk was.

  239. Sam from MA Says:

    DONALD TRUMP IS A RINO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  240. Jason Says:

    234: That is quite an accomplishment. Huckabee got more viewers than a prison show, a stalker show, and Headline News. He should be proud of himself. Now, what are the actual number of viewers?

  241. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    •Someone else (vol.) 3% [4%] {5%} (7%) [6%] {5%} (8%)
    •None/No one (vol.) 4% [3%] {4%} (4%) [0%] {5%} (2%)
    •No opinion 1% [2%] {2%} (6%) [4%] {1%} (3%)

    Ok, I fully understand the thinking of the ‘someone else’ and ‘no opinion’ crowd but.. the ‘None/No One’ are either just being difficult or just don’t understand the question.

    Or are some of these by mistake that Bob Hope clearly describes:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RWpU8sX10_4&feature=related

  242. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    Jason,

    Just a couple million over the weekend. Why?

  243. Jason Says:

    Funny that Craig wants to bring up Huck’s ratings. Chris Matthews on MSNBC gets better ratings than Huck:

    Huck’s: 213

    http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/cable-news-rating-sunday-april-10_b61347#more-61347

    Matthews’: 232

    http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/cable-news-ratingsd-monday-april-11_b61398

    Not exactly something to brag about.

  244. Jason Says:

    Where are you getting your numbers Craig?

  245. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    Trump…Would like to see run 56%
    Palin…Would like to see run 53%
    Gingrich…Would like to see run 51%

    Of that motley crew, I would have picked Trump, too.

    But I hope none continue after South Carolina’s primary. They would all serve the Republican party in much better other ways, imho.

  246. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    Jason,

    Just Google Fox News Sat and Sun numbers to get demos as well…

  247. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    I normaly skip about half the comments but I went back to read all yours, Jason.

    Wow, this poll really got to ya. ;)

  248. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    *normally ..oops

  249. Joshua Says:

    #70 Craig: George Washington had no children, although he had two stepchildren.

  250. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    Thanks, Josh :)

    I was over at C4Palin and WOW do those nuts hate Romney or what?

    By the way, here’s their headline (and I’m not kidding),

    CNN Poll Shows that Governor Palin Probably Leads If You Take Huckabee, Trump, and Bachmann Out of the Poll

  251. Ben Says:

    Yes they do hate Romney – with a vitriolic passion. It’s kinda weird. Although I’m not much of a Huckabee fan at least I can be cordial with you folks on here. Over there is like a snake pit.

    Woohoo – I’m #250 – if I get it posted in time. :)

  252. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    Let the good times roll..well almost.

    2012 Presidential Matchups

    Election 2012: Obama Between 42% and 49% Against All Republicans Tested

    Tuesday, April 12, 2011 Email to a Friend Share This …

    Not much has changed in the dynamics over the past couple of months in early 2012 election polling. No matter which of 10 Republicans is matched against President Obama, the president earns between 42% and 49% of the vote. That same dynamic was found earlier this year and suggests the election is still shaping up as a referendum on the president. That’s typical when an incumbent runs for reelection.

    The numbers show that Mike Huckabee runs even with Obama at this point. Mitt Romney, who just formally entered the race, trails the president by five, 45% to 40%. Others who trail by single digits include Ron Paul and Haley Barbour.

    Candidates trailing by double digits include Sarah Palin, Newt Gingrich, Tim Pawlenty, Mitch Daniels, Herman Cain and Jon Huntsman.

    The match-up surveys of 2,000 or 1,000 Likely Voters were conducted from March 6 – March 31, 2011 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error for surveys of 2,000 is +/- 2% with a 95% level of confidence; the margin of sampling error for surveys of 1,000 is +/- 3% with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC. See methodology.

  253. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    Thanks, Ben. I like friendly Romney supporters. It’s refreshing and we are all on the same ‘BEAT OBAMA’ team. Just different spots on the depth chart. :)

  254. jerry franklin Says:

    Hurray! Go Huckabee! This poll accurately reflects how I’ve been feeling lately. At first I thought Donald Trump was a joke but I’ve changed my mind. Actually I’m really quite impressed with the man and now see him in a new light. Of course Mike Huckabee will always be my guy but Trump has moved into 2nd place ahead of Bachmann. I think many people feel the same and this poll reflects that. Make no mistake, Huckabee is running and will win the nomination. But there’s definitely a place for Trump in a Huckabee administration,lol. Unlike McCain , Mike Huckabee will reward those who helped him along the way.

  255. Bob Hovic Says:

    “CNN Poll Shows that Governor Palin Probably Leads If You Take Huckabee, Trump, and Bachmann Out of the Poll”

    LOL!!!! Classic.

    I did a comment a few weeks back where I argued that Daniels (who wasn’t in the poll) was winning if you threw the undecideds and Barbour to him, as well as factoring in the MoE.

    But I was joking.

  256. Stephen Hall Says:

    “CNN Poll Shows that Governor Palin Probably Leads If You Take Huckabee, Trump, and Bachmann Out of the Poll”

    Someone’s been overdosing on the Kool-Aid lately.

  257. Ben Says:

    Craig

    LOL – Can I assume that you feel you are on the starters and I am a bench warmer? :D

  258. TEX Says:

    Drudge Headline

    OUT OF CONTROL: DEFICIT ROCKETS 16% IN FIRST HALF OF YEAR
    ==============================

    Nothing to wary about!

    We have crew of GOP squishy,cowardly sell outs to take
    care of it.

    According to them they did great job,they made great
    deal with Libs.Just ask them or most of people on this
    site.

  259. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    Too bad there is’t a C4Rick site because you might have seen this headline TODAY (to parody C4P’s wackiness lead by their ace commenters, TEX and Telly who I usually see over there) ..

    New CNN Poll Shows that Santorum Probably Leads If You Take Daniels, Bachmann, Paul, Romney, Gingrich, Palin, Trump, Roemer, Karger, Snooki, Cain, and Huckabee Out of the Poll ;)

  260. Liz Says:

    It’s Bonham. There’s not two Jasons smart like that.

  261. TEX Says:

    Liberal preacher from Arkansas has only one way
    to go,down.

    He knows that,that’s why he will not run for anything,except to the nearest buffet restaurant to talk about how bad it is to be fat.

    Mouchelle Obama and her friend preacher Huckabee
    are experts about the subject.

  262. Liz Says:

    I wonder if Jerry Franklin has seen the Candy Mountain video starring Charlie the Unicorn.

  263. Liz Says:

    Tex, politics makes me mean too. It’s a weakness. And this blog is the dealer.

  264. TEX Says:

    Liz,

    Don’t be mean.

    If you noticed I laugh a lot on this
    site.Try it,there are plenty of reasons
    to have laughs here,most of the time.

  265. Craig for Huck in '12 Says:

    Ben Says:
    April 12th, 2011 at 5:44 pm
    “Craig

    LOL – Can I assume that you feel you are on the starters and I am a bench warmer? :)”

    Ben,

    Nah, I was just thinking how as a big Los Angeles Angels fan myself, how we for instance, called up a 21 year old kid last night off our Salt Lake City farm team depth chart.

    But unfortunately he got bombed for four runs early but so what!!! We’re keeping the Salt Lake Bee, Tyler Chatwood in the Big Leagues. He’s the real deal but as our #5 starter on the depth chart. Kinda like Romney. ;)

    Huckabee though is our Ace. And Obama knows it.

    And now I’m off to Angel Stadium to get even with the Indians tonight. Wish us luck. I’m sure Kavon will have some more polls up when I get home tonight. Rasmussen and PPP look very, VERY interesting indeed…

    Go Angels!

  266. Matt "MWS" Says:

    Tex,

    “Liberal preacher from Arkansas has only one way
    to go,down.”

    Not true. If you’re referring to Huck, he’s closer to 0% than he is 100%, so there’s more room on the upside.

    BTW, since you consider yourself pretty clairvoyant, when do you think Palin will hit single digits nationally, and not just in individual states? She’s been hanging on by a thread for a month or two now…..

  267. Matt "MWS" Says:

    Tex,

    I KNOW you foresaw Palin losing 80% of her supporters, didn’t you?

  268. TEX Says:

    Matt,

    I guess you’ll never get it.

    The polls will have some meaning ONLY AFTER Sarah Palin
    starts campaign,getting huge crowds(nobody can even come close) ripping to shreds Obama and his Marxist policies,thrilling the masses.

    Then,we can talk about polls.Until that time,I’ll have
    good laughs watching meaningless and worthless polls
    and people’s reactions.

    If you think The Donald touched the nerve,wait until
    Sarahcuda starts the “demolition derby”.

  269. TEX Says:

    Sarah Palin didn’t lose anybody.
    It’s all in your head.

  270. Matt "MWS" Says:

    Tex,

    I agree that Sarah is a demolition derby. That’s why she’s lost 80% of her supporters. Ever since the McCain campaign stopped handling her, it’s been straight down for her.

  271. Matt "MWS" Says:

    Tex,

    As for those huge, adoring crowds you expect, you clearly don’t understand how fickle the American people are when it comes to their celebrities.

  272. mac Says:

    Received my first Huckabee for Haridopolos mailer today, if Marco can take down Good time Charlie, then hopefully Haridopolos can beat Nelson.

  273. Adam X Says:

    The blog Red Racing Horses is reporting that T-Paw will announce he is officially in at 9 PM.

    http://redracinghorses.com/diary/303/potus-tpaw-is-in

  274. Stop the Hate Says:

    Among Republicans
    •Mike Huckabee 24%
    •Donald Trump 15%
    •Newt Gingrich 14%
    •Sarah Palin 14%
    •Mitt Romney 9%

  275. Smack1968 Says:

    TPAW will be on Piers Morgan’s show tonight saying that he is in the race to win.

    GO GET EM TPAW!!!

  276. Corep Says:

    i guess it all comes down to whether or not we want to beat Obama. According to Rasmussen only Romney does it. Huck is the other one who has a chance(he’s tied). so get rid of the useless 10 and get down to seriousness and poll the only ones who can win against our common enemy. Huck,Romney and maybe Barbour (down 8) and Paul (down the same)

  277. TEX Says:

    Corep,

    You are so smart.
    Why have campaigns?Long primaries?

    No,let’s have polls chose republican candidate full year and the half before general election.

    Hell,why have elections?Polls can decide our next
    president too.

    Corep you’re so smart it’s frightening!

  278. Franklin Says:

    Huckabee 44
    Santorum 43
    Romney 43
    Palin 39

    The difference between Palin and Huckabee is 5 points. The difference between Santorum, Romney and Palin is 5% points. Hardly overwhelming. The fact is that Palin will draw a huge amount of interest if she decides to run and she’ll have a chance to counter the image of her. As to negatives, these polls don’t break it down into somewhat negatives and very negatives.
    People who are somewhat negative can be that way because of something they have heard or by pollsters who push them to make a decision. The polls that measure these show her very negatives are in the 30s including a state poll in Michigan. These polls mean nothing until we know who is even in.

    In terms of the CNN poll, Gingrich is the big loser. He’s running behind Palin who is likely handicapped by a perception that she is not running.

    As to polls, they have been corrupted by the media. At one time, if you needed some news, take a poll and report it. Now its write the story and produce a poll that confirms it. PPP has been caught with phony polls in Wis, Mich, and Fla. ABC/Washington Post got caught with misleading polls during the mid-terms.

  279. 'Cuda Says:

    http://www.gallup.com/poll/147077/Romney-Not-Generating-Strong-Positive-Intensity.aspx#1

  280. teledude Says:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rEs0Ryr-2kY&feature=player_embedded#at=66

  281. Josiah Schmidt Says:

    Does anyone else think TEX’s postings have an almost poetic rhythm to them? I wonder if that’s on purpose. For instance…

    This is actually a haiku:

    Liberal preacher
    from Arkansas has only
    one way to go, down.

    And this could be something straight out of an e.e.cumming book:

    He knows that,that’s why
    he will not run for anything,
    except to the nearest buffet restaurant
    to talk about how bad it is
    to be fat.

    Mouchelle Obama
    and her friend preacher Huckabee
    are experts
    about the subject.

    I enjoy TEX’s postings. :)

  282. ????? Says:

    This is very fascinating, You’re an overly professional blogger. I’ve joined your feed and look ahead to in the hunt for more of your great post. Also, I’ve shared your site in my social networks

Join The Community


Sponsored Ad

Meta

Site Meter

Recent Posts

Sponsored Ad

Categories

Archives

Search

Blogroll

Site Syndication

Main