Rasmussen Reports (O46 R45); Bounce fades to nil

rasmussen reports ^ | 9/12/12 | rasmussen

[Ravi]

see above

[Last Dakotan]

Then why did we end up with a crappy candidate.(?)

No good ones ran.

[GOPsterinMA]

“Then why did we end up with a crappy candidate.”

My simple theory is: People want the vanilla white guy with good hair, a wife and normal family who talks to them in a comforting manner.

In other words, pretty much the opposite of Obama.

[rushmom]

I would speculate this nomination was promised to Romney four years ago and the establishment GOP told some of our conservative governors, etc. to stay out of the race. They complied and our conservatives in the primary, although good people, were a B team and easier for Romney to dispatch.

[Cringing Negativism Network]

Welcome to FR.

[profit_guy]

[rushmom]

One point lead for Romney with leaners.

[mountainlion]

I think that zero will be blown out of the water tomorrow.

[rushmom]

Clearly he doesn’t remember John McCain.

[ConservativeDude]

interesting.....I would have thought that the “certain Romney” number would be a point or two higher. Perhaps a few conservatives are holding back? Seems about a 1% bump could be had there for those few conservatives lagging...but obviously that micro-targeting has to be pretty specific.

Then there are the “leaners” which I take to be the beloved independents. CW says those should “break to the challenger” but obama’s “leaners” is slightly larger. So....I think the task at hand is to make sure that those who will break to Romney show up and vote, and vote Romney...and that those who would break to obama simply don’t have a reason to vote and therefore don’t bother.

Of course I am also hoping that the “certain Romney” broken glass voters at 40% is actually larger than the “certain obama” voters. Problem is the data doesn’t show that...as of now.

Romney has a good chance.

But he has a little ways to go.

I’m hoping that if WE know that, so do the “campaign professionals”.