Skip to comments.Gingrich worse against Obama than Romney: Reuters/Ipsos poll (Barf Bag Required)
Posted on 12/14/2011 7:08:50 AM PST by AngelesCrestHighway
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Newt Gingrich holds a 10-point lead in the fight for the Republican presidential nomination, but he would fare worse against President Barack Obama than Republican Mitt Romney, according to a new Reuters/Ipsos poll. With the first nominating contest in Iowa less than three weeks away, Gingrich leads Romney among Republican voters nationwide by 28 percent to 18 percent, the poll found. However, the poll raises questions about whether Gingrich -- a former speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives who has shot to the top of Republican opinion polls in recent weeks -- would be able to defeat Obama. The poll found that if the November 2012 presidential election were held today, Obama would defeat Gingrich, 51 percent to 38 percent. By contrast, Obama would defeat Romney by a narrower margin, 48 percent to 40 percent.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Yep...all the “experts” continue to TRY and influence our actions.
Since I know the political persuasion of the vast majority of “experts,” I think I shall ignore them.
Newt thinks progressive FDR is was the greatest president ever.
It’s Reuters so it HAS to be true. LOL ...
The explaination is very simple. To simple for the Beltway dolts to grasp.
The Republican primary voters have been paying attention to the debates and been persuaded by hearing what Newt has to say. The general electorate voter has not been paying attention to the debates or listening to Newt and therefore are not yet persuaded. One debate between Obamaa and Newt and the contest will be over. Obama will be finished.
I don’t see any reason why the poll isn’t accurate; it’s consistent with a wide variety of national head-to-head matchup polls.
The simple reality is that there’s a massive group of independents and moderate Republicans and Democrats in the electorate that will support whichever parties’ candidate is perceived as closest to the political center (and no, there’s no mathematical way “getting out the base!” will compensate for a candidate that’s not liked by the hordes mushy middle).
You may not LIKE that reality, but it’s there. The strange idea that the more “true conservative” a candidate is, the better they will do in the general election is a fantasy.
McCain didn’t lose because he wasn’t conservative enough.
The MSM and Dems have nearly a full year to rehabilitate and resurrect The One to his former glory. Heck, if Newt can be reborn into some grand new savior, so can The One — and he has incumbency on his side.
Look at the recent joblessness percent — drops miraculously to 8.6% in just a couple of months. Imagine how it will drop in the coming 10 months leading up to November 2012. Gas prices? Just dump a few million barrels of oil onto the market from the Strategic Reserve, and watch gasoline prices drop. Clinton showed the way on that.
Polishing the t*rd has only begun.
This will all change once Newt stomps the AnointedIdiot into a mudhole come the first Presidential debate (given if Newt wins the GOP nomination).
Is that the leftist European media propaganda outfit which ran photo-shopped mideast images?
Or am I mistaking them for some other leftist media propaganda outfit?
Yet more insightful “Poll is wrong because it doesn’t show what I want” analysis.
“Newt thinks progressive FDR is was the greatest president ever.”
He said of The 20th century.
And he based that on leadership qualities, not like he gave some endorsement of the New Deal.
You’re assuming 1) that debates will vastly influence people and 2) that they will be objectively judged by the electorate based on content. I don’t think either are safe assumptions.
Remember that people who heard the Kennedy/Nixon debate on radio thought Nixon won, but those who saw it on TV thought Kennedy won.
A lot of undecideds watching the debates will judge it on whoever is better looking and seems to “care” more. And may well resent the professor/smartest guy in the room. A lot of dumb people hate smart people.
That said Gingrich at least has a chance in the general election but it’s going to be very, very hard. It will depend on how well the Obama campaign team can turn him into Hitler.
And if the economy DOES ACTUALLY turn around a little (and is perceived that way) I don’t think Gingrich would have a chance.
What is the purpose of the campaign?
Left sure trying hard to get Romney nominated.
at least all the MSM’s and RINO’s are in agreement oon something
newt is the worst of the worst. not only is he a rino - but he has scandal and sleeze attached to him.
If we are forced to deal with a rino - at least we should get an honest rino without the ick factor like huntsman and someone who will not alienate people.
Newt - obama 2nd term.
Because in life we are issued a certain amount of positive and a certain amount of negative which give us a balance. You cannot erase the negative so you must learn to not allow the trash to enter your Computer ( The Human Brain )so be careful from whence you gather facts in your life......... Yahoo is renowned for leaning right under Obamas thinking warped as it is. The only reason they exist at all is there ad revenue. I preferred the Wall Street Journal for my information as well as here. So I personally would not believe anything to come from that area of dis-information headed by another Obama Lover...
The further up that pole you shinny the more your axelrod butt is exposed.
Its the truth. Tell me - do you trust newt or romney?
I don’t think Obama will debate Newt.. Just a hunch.. Something will come up.
You aren’t worth the spit to wash you off the bottom of my shoe, but it might help you to come back to reality when I tell you I’m firmly backing Newt Gingrich to be the next President. Whom do you support, poseur?
Nice insults and childish attacks by someone who cant the fact that Newt is a joke and will lose to Obama easily.
I support Paul / Bachmann / Santorum
Newt is a liar and sleezebag. He will alienate women and indes and lose to Obama. Why vote for slezebag-lite with newt when you can vote for sleaze-full with Obama?
Newt is not trustworthy, is unreliable, and will fold like a tent to obama.
How old are you 12? I would support any of those three over Newt or Romney.
Newt or Romney = liars, flip floppers, conflicted, and RINOs.
Tell me - why do you trust Newt?
Look at their accomplishments. Newt allied himself with Ronald Reagan to build the Reagan Coalition, the Religious Right, and the Republican majority (together the Reagan Revolution) which directly led the downfall of the Soviet Union, the Contract with America, Reagan economy.
Romney, on the other hand, vehemently denied Ronald Reagan and aligned himself with Ted Kennedy and the left. Romney accomplished installing liberal big government programs, defended and promoted Roe v Wade and legalized abortion as settled law, advocated and implemented RomneyCare with its liberty killing government mandates against formerly free citizens and its taxpayer funded or subsidized and mandated abortion procedures. He ran and governed to the left of Ted Kennedy on the gay agenda resulting in gay marriage in Massachusetts. He appointed liberal judges and liberal appointees throughout his government. Under his leadership conservatism and the Republican party was all but destroyed in Massachusetts.
Romney is one evil liberal progressive. No way in hell will MittBots be allowed to support this abortionist, big government, socialist scumbag on FR!
Guess my message isnt clear enough. I have to keep repeating it and zotting would be MittBots.
79posted on Saturday, December 03, 2011 10:59:37 PMby Jim Robinson
Now buzz off you poseur twit.
Hillarious - I dont support Mittens.
And Newt will get destroyed by obama due to the female vote.
But keep telling yourself that Newt can win. When we are left with Obama for 4 more years you will know why.
Yup. And Newt wants to streamline and cut government spending as well. Cut budgets, cut unnecessary and wasteful programs, even entitlements. Use the tenth amendment to return functions like medicare to the states and the people. Privatize social security for the younger generations. Return education to the states and localities. Reduce healthcare costs by making insurance portable across state lines, tort reform, returning the functions to the states and people where they can control costs for covering the poor locally. Make health insurance tax deductible and privatize and encourage private health accounts, etc.
He has a recorded history of successfully cutting taxes, cutting welfare programs, cutting spending, cutting deficits and balancing the budget.
75posted on Monday, December 12, 2011 8:47:40 PMby Jim Robinson
BTW, your version of 'concern troll' isn't very stealthy, get it?
Newt may claim to be for all those things, and that is fine - but he cant beat obama.
His problem - women voters.
Whether its fair or not - Newt will alienate women to a degree giving maobama the edge whether you want to admit it or not.
Newt will just go on the air debating an empty chair and make it sound like "what's the differnce?"
If I recall, in the 2008 election when McCain started pulling away in the Republican primary, the polls showed him trouncing Obama in double digits. We all know how that turned out. Of course, the media was oblivious to those polls. The media and establishment Repubs are so petrified of Newt that they are working OT to destroy his candidacy. Newt will be pouncing on Obama every day, educating the public about how dangerous another 4 years of O would be. And if nothing else, Newt will be remembered for how he destroyed Obama in the debates.
Given the ‘times’ we and this country are in and enduring, people better get their collective heads out their arses and watch these debates given they will dictate the future of this country, for good or bad..... =.=
Be assured, I will be watching given I want to see this AnointedIdiot get stomped into a multitude of mudholes and from what I have seen thus far, there is but one man who can do the literal verbal stomping: Gingrich.