Skip to comments.Rasmussen Presidential Tracking Poll (Romney 48%, Obama 44%)
Posted on 04/13/2012 10:05:22 AM PDT by BarnacleCenturion
The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Friday shows that 24% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as president. Forty-one percent (41%) Strongly Disapprove, giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -17.
In a hypothetical Election 2012 matchup, Mitt Romney earns 48% of the vote, while President Obama attracts 44%. That's Romney's biggest advantage in over a month.
(Excerpt) Read more at rasmussenreports.com ...
I assume that related to the Republican primaries. When we get to the general election, an entirely different reality is present. See below the content of an e-mail I received this morning.
Political Futures "If Mitt wins the nomination, as seems very likely, I will enthusiastically support his candidacy. For my friends who have hesitation on that score, I'd just ask you to keep four things in mind: Justice Scalia just turned 78, Justice Kennedy will turn 78 later this year, Justice Breyer will be 76 in August, and Justice Ginsburg turned 81 about a week ago. We wish them all well, of course, but the brute fact is that whoever we elect as president in November is almost certainly going to choose at least one and maybe more new members of the Supreme Court -- in addition to hundreds of other life-tenured federal judges, all of whom will be making momentous decisions about our lives for decades to come. If you don't think it matters whether the guy making those calls is Mitt Romney or Barack Obama, I think you're smokin' something funky." --columnist Andrew McCarthy
About a month before Election Day, start looking at the Undecided number. About 2/3 (66%)of the Undecideds always go for the Challenger. If an incumbent still hasn’t won them over after 4 years, he’s a goner. So, if Romney is at 47 percent and Obozo is at 45 percent with the Undecideds at 8 percent, a month before the Election, look for Romney to win with 52 percent with 48 percent for the Marxist Muslim.
I hate to tell ya......but the ham sandwich dropped outta the race & into my stomach.
Thanks for your support
To paraphrase the Sgt York movie:”I ain’t drinkin’ fer Mitt Romney, I’ma drinkin’ AGIN’ Barak Obama...”
The good Lord knows we have enough ammo to mock him thoroughly throughout the next few months. Rachel Madcow took 15 MINUTES last night on MSNBC to try to explain why Rosen's comments about Ann Romney weren't insulting to every full-time or part-time mom in the country. It was hilarious
I have a feeling that the left is literally going to implode so badly that the irrational name-calling will become so blatantly obvious that most Americans will begin to realize that it is the only platform the Democrats have to run on.
“the continuation of active boosterism by some is beyond annoying.”
If Obambi moves ahead again in the polls you can brag about it all you want. I for one just want to see the Kenyan defeated.
“With a crony Spainish company handling the vote counting in the Nov.2012 election I see no problem for a second term....”
If it is allowed.
Disappointment here at FR abounds!!
“I aint drinkin fer Mitt Romney, Ima drinkin AGIN Barak Obama...”
That’s my attitude for the presidential race. I am voting Newt in my primary, by the way. But in November, I am voting AGAINST Obama. I have no problem with voting against people.
“If people applaud Romney leading Obama in the polls, etc., is that going to run afoul of FR’s policy regarding supporting Romney?”
Where is that Policy set forth? Could you cite us a source on that? While most people on here, including yours truly, can’t stand Romney’s political philosophy, I believe this is still the United States of America and Freedom of Speech is still a right. I don’t think FR practices Censorship. Correct me if I’m wrong.
My interpretation of the "rules" is that it is considered poor form on FR to be a "booster" of Romney, but it is perfectly acceptable to want Obama to lose and lose big.
To me, the situation is similar to four years ago. I really disliked McCain, in fact, I think I can say that I detest McCain even more than I do Romney. But Palin was the spoonful of sugar that made the medicine go down and I happily voted for the McCain/Palin ticket.
Not sure how happy I'll be with my choice this November but in my opinion, the stakes are much higher this go around. An Obama re-election will be the ruin of us all. So while I will not support Romney on FR, I will be rooting for Obama to lose.
Now that Romney’s assured of the Republican nomination, he’s become armed and dangerous to Democrats, since he’s now capable of wielding his deadly Etch-a-Sketch powers to win over independents — the ones who decide elections.
We KNOW another four years of Obama would destroy the country; however, we DON’T know that four years of Romney would. A major difference. Go, Mitt.
Well, but McCarthy doesn’t set the policy for Free Republic. Jim Robinson does, and I understood his recent posts to mean that supporting Romney here even during the general election campaign won’t be tolerated. I’m honestly wondering because I don’t know.
“I’d just ask you to keep four things in mind: Justice Scalia just turned 78, Justice Kennedy will turn 78 later this year, Justice Breyer will be 76 in August, and Justice Ginsburg turned 81 about a week ago.”
That’s worth repeating over and over..
The Obama debacle, especially when he could have been a very good president, really ruined it for them.
All Zero had to do was be a moderate, pro growth, strong on supporting allies while giving the brush back pitches to adversaries and he would have been a shoe in for a second term - with pretty good approval ratings DESPITE the fact that he is an illegal immigrant who does not meet Article II Sect. I. That issue wouldn't have gotten any traction at all if the economy had been unleashed from his Marxist "strongman" proclivities.
But no, sadly, Obama thought he had a mandate to transform America - into a Marxist/Leninist utopia . . .
Hubris on an unprecedented scale mixed with an overwhelming sense of entitlement and delusions of grandeur.
I'm always reminded of what Obama's high school basketball coach told him early on in his term when the coach was invited to the White House for some typical Obama "rubbing his nose in it" - - -the coach said to Dunham's smirking little face - "you know, you were never as good on the court as you thought you were" . . . .
Buh bye, Buckwheat.
As Casey Stengel said, “can’t anyone here play this game?”
Hillary is licking her chops.
That’s the impression I got, too.
The First Amendment and freedom of speech applies to actions taken by the government only. There is nothing saying that a private entity, which obviously includes Free Republic, can't limit discussion on a forum it provides. To put it differently, Fox News doesn't have to let Bernie Sanders rant on about the evils of capitalism if it doesn't want to.
The owner/host/HMFIC of FR is Jim Robinson, who has every right to set any rules he chooses, or to "censor" opinions he believes do not support conservatism. And many a post has been "zotted" by the moderators if they believe it is pushing a left-wing agenda. Jim's had a couple of threads in recent days that make it clear that FR doesn't support Romney. I'm just trying to figure out what that means, exactly, in terms of which discussions will be permitted.
Anyway, I assume that will be cleared up over time by us seeing which posts are being zotten, and which aren't.
IMO, Rasmussen has been the most accurate poll and PPP has been the most worthless.