May 23, 2011

Poll Watch: UNH/WMUR/CNN New Hampshire GOP Primary

University of New Hampshire/WMUR/CNN New Hampshire Republican Primary

  • Romney – 33% (36)
  • Paul – 9% (6)
  • Gingrich – 7% (4)
  • Giuliani – 6% (7)
  • Pawlenty – 6% (2)
  • Palin – 5% (4)
  • Bachmann – 4% (4)
  • Cain – 4% (-)
  • Huntsman – 4% (*)
  • Santorum – 2% (*)
  • Johnson – * (*)
  • Someone else – 7%
  • Not sure/no opinion – 13%

Who is your second choice?

  • Romney – 20%
  • Palin – 10%
  • Pawlenty – 8%
  • Bachmann – 7%
  • Giuliani – 6%
  • Gingrich – 5%
  • Paul – 4%
  • Cain – 3%
  • Huntsman – 2%
  • Santorum – 2%
  • Johnson – 1%

Survey of 347 likely primary voters was completed May 18-22 and has an MoE of 5%. Numbers in parentheses are from the April 15-May 2 poll.

They actually included Daniels for the first three days of this poll. He pulled 4% before he dropped out.

Obviously some great news for Pawlenty and Huntsman here. Surprising that Gingrich actually gained supporters given the week or two he’s had. And while Romney is maintaining his massive lead over the other candidates, Huck and Trump dropping out doesn’t look like it’s boosted him any in New Hampshire.

by @ 4:31 pm. Filed under New Hampshire Primary, Poll Watch
Trackback URL for this post:
http://race42012.com/2011/05/23/poll-watch-unhwmurcnn-new-hampshire-gop-primary/trackback/

114 Responses to “Poll Watch: UNH/WMUR/CNN New Hampshire GOP Primary”

  1. New York for Romney 2012 Says:

    Great news for Pawlenty? Ron Paul is even higher than him, call me when he breaks double digits.

  2. Matt Coulter Says:

    #1 — Pawlenty tripling his support and pulling the same % as Giuliani in NH? I’d call that great news.

  3. New York for Romney 2012 Says:

    2. For all the talk of Pawlenty being in the top tier, him polling at 6% is pathetic. And tripling his support (which i’m guessing he was at 2% last poll?), is only due to Huckabee & trump dropping out. This is close to Pawlenty’s cieling unless more well know candidates pull out.

  4. CraigS Says:

    Obviously, I am confused and missed the ” great news” for Huntsman and Pawlenty. Both have been to New Hampshire a lot more than Mitt since the last poll and both are ” up ” LESS than the MOE ?
    Wow! Breathtaking

    CraigS

  5. Steven S. Says:

    Only candidate not named Romney to lead in a category: Best candidate on terrorism: Rudy

  6. New York for Romney 2012 Says:

    I haven’t seen any indicators of TPaw becoming the anti-mitt candidate.

  7. New York for Romney 2012 Says:

    Did they poll Fred Karger? I’m trying to figure out of his awesome frisbee commercial is helping him out.

  8. Matt Coulter Says:

    Romney’s topline has decreased from 40 to 36 and now to 33 in the past three UNH/WMUR polls. Meanwhile, his opponents are getting stronger. Romney’s margin of victory was once at +30 and is now at +24.

    Obviously, Romney has a massive lead here, and one that I’m glad to see. However, if he’s not careful, the trendlines are moving in the wrong direction. He can’t take NH by attrition, he’s got to have some momentum here and win big if he wants it to impact South Carolina or Florida.

  9. mcon Says:

    I think the positive movement for Gingrich even with his terrible week makes this seem to be a bit of an outlier.

  10. Texcon Says:

    If it’s great news for anyone other than Romney its Ron Paul. The Paulies are great ballot box stuffers for straw polls and internet surveys but this looks legit.

  11. Somone You Know Says:

    Still wondering why Pawlenty is the alternative to Mitt.

  12. New York for Romney 2012 Says:

    8. That’s because Guiliani is included. Bet you that all of his 6% moderate support goes to Romney.

  13. Steven S. Says:

    Most people are out there SEARCHING. They aren’t going to all head to Romney or Pawlenty or whoever else in droves. When we finally DECREASE our candidates, then you will see new patterns such as more leftover voters heading in a candidate’s camp.

  14. asparagus Says:

    The risk of running in New Hampshire is that Ron Paul beats you. If I’m Tim, I’m spending my money in SC.

  15. New York for Romney 2012 Says:

    It should be no surprise that Ron Paul polls at 9%, he got 7% last time. That small support will always be there…

  16. asparagus Says:

    Romney is also dominating on second choice. That should tell you how untouchable his lead is. None of these guys have anything close to what McCain had to beat Romney last time. It would take a massive “Operation Chaos” by the Dems to beat Romney here.

  17. Matthew E. Miller Says:

    Totally off-topic but I’m finally watching Pawlenty’s announcement speech on C-Span and…well, I’d really like Mary Pawlenty to run for something. If this doesn’t work out for Tim, I’d love to see her go toe to toe with Klohbachar (sp?). She has decades of experience as a judge so would probably make a plausible Senator.

  18. Matt "MWS" Says:

    Someone,

    “Still wondering why Pawlenty is the alternative to Mitt.”

    Yes, he is.

  19. asparagus Says:

    When you add the 2nd choices, Romney is starting this thing with a base close to 50%, that is before doing ANY campaigning. Why anyone else would do any campaigning here is beyond me.

  20. Matt "MWS" Says:

    Matthew,

    Maybe Tim and Mary will be the Bill and Hillary of the Republican party?

    …..minus the shady land deals, adultery, and shattered ashtrays, of course……

  21. Matt "MWS" Says:

    asparagus,

    “When you add the 2nd choices, Romney is starting this thing with a base close to 50%”

    Sort of, but the divisor now is 200%, since everyone gets to pick two people.

  22. Matt Coulter Says:

    By the way,

    Which Republican candidate do you think is best able to handle health care issues?
    Romney 31%
    Paul 8%
    Gingrich 7%
    Palin 5%
    Everyone else – below 3%

    Dang that albatross of MassCare around his neck… Heh.

  23. georgie Says:

    Did anyone else feel like all this “Hunstman is a frontrunner” talk is being pushed by the media? I just am not seeing it. Like a week ago everyone just started saying he’s a frontrunner…why and how?

  24. Matthew E. Miller Says:

    georgie,

    Because the Bushies and McCain folks love him. Same deal as Daniels. The establishment picks our “frontrunners” and it’s a crock and the insurgent candidates and their supporters have a legitimate gripe about it. Yes, Huntsman has a great resume and should at least be considered (before being rejected as insufficiently conservative and strangely clueless about primary politics) but he shouldn’t be placed in front-runner territory a month after returning from China and after 5 days of semi-campaigning. Rick Santorum also has a pretty good resume and yet I’ve nada attempts to place him in the front-runner category.

  25. asparagus Says:

    21 yes, but its not as if its Romney vs. everybody else. there’s quite a bit of overlap, and he is the second choice of a plurality of non-Romney voters. That’s a pretty impressive lead. Where was Rudy at this point in 2007?

  26. Matt Coulter Says:

    Here’s the news report which reflects my sentiments in #8 and in the OP:

    http://youtu.be/1UFEo1BAWBE

  27. Rightgal Says:

    Huntman got a grunch of praise and loving from Rocky Anderson, former liberal democrat mayor of Salt Lake City on MSNBC the other day. It seems the Obama admin and their lacky’s are working overtime to make sure that Huntsman is out there, trying to be the ‘anti romney’ pick – the democrats pick. I like Huntsman personally, but I don’t want him to be my president.

  28. Matt "MWS" Says:

    Matt C,

    Of course Romney’s lead will shrink, considerably. Consider:

    1. NOBODY has ever won NH by this margin in a competitive (non-incumbent) primary.
    2. Among the contenders, only Mitt has spent at least 3 days in everyone’s living in New Hampshire, kissed every baby, and had his ads viewed an average of 2981 times.
    3. Other than Palin and Newt, no one else has name ID, or has crossed the “viability threshold” but they will.

  29. Matthew E. Miller Says:

    The thing is, there’s mileage in the McCain-route. The truth-teller who’s always reasonable except when he’s poking his fellow partisans in the eye. It’s not universally employed because it’s divisive and a lousy way to run a sustained campaign. McCain was always weaker than he looked because nobody properly accounted for how much conservatives despised him and, in the end, what he’d have to do to regain their support and enthusiasm (make a pretty bomb-thrower from Alaska his running mate). Guys like Metro are always complaining that McCain’s Palin selection cost him all kinds of suburban and urban voters and he’s right, in a sense. But McCain’s Palin selection, or something very much like it, was already baked into the McCain equation. Because he was John McCain, running against a guy who had a wildly enthusiastic base and managed to raise 800 million dollars. Palin is what you get when you nominate John McCain or, for that, Jon Huntsman. Nominees should never have to convince base voters to donate, volunteer, or even vote, months after they’ve locked up the nomination. That sort of nominee is NOT electable. Because they’ll have to do something wildly unelectable just to get to square 1.

  30. asparagus Says:

    Matt, the previous polls are only reflecting name ID, so naturally his mammoth lead is going to go down as voters look at other options. I don’t think you can point to a trend and say someone is pulling away from the pack and taking votes away from Romney. Especially when you add second choice, you can see that Romney is starting off with a huge lead, declining or not.

  31. nowandlater Says:

    Huntsman’s been laying out some Ron Paul type dog whistles.

    1. Wouldn’t invade Libya — Paulites would love that.
    2. Vote for the Ryan plan — Again agreeable to Paulites.
    3. Still for civil unions — Yep, Paulites would love it.

    I’m curious if he is for legalizing marijuana?

    So is Huntsman a closet Libertarian who happens to be the media darling? Methinkso, I think so and that is why I am strongly considering him.

  32. CF Says:

    26 -

    What is more troubling is that that 19% did not any other candidate either. Romney went from a difference of 17% to 23% between him and the second highest candidate (Ron Paul).

    This is good news for Romney. He’s got NH in the bag. What is far more important is how he now looks in IA and SC, which I am confident he’ll take as well.

  33. Matt "MWS" Says:

    CF,

    “He’s got NH in the bag.”

    Nobody. Ever. Has. New. Hampshire. “In the bag.”

    I take it this is your first go around?

  34. CF Says:

    30 -

    So you think that Romney has more name recognition than Ron Paul, Newt Gingrich, Sarah Palin, Rudy Guliani, or even Tim Pawlenty? I doubt it.

    Romney’s huge lead isn’t going anywhere in NH.

  35. LV Says:

    Maybe the puff piece the WSJ did on him today will get him an few points in the polls…..Especially after the mean and nasty personal way they treated Romney last week.

  36. CF Says:

    Is it possible to ban someone like MWS and Adam X from these comment boards when they have been proven wrong about, well, everything since they first started yacking their mouth off here? Just askin, because the noisy peanut gallery is getting old.

  37. Matt "MWS" Says:

    Warning to Rombots,

    Romney’s lead will shrink. The press and voters want a competitive race. Nature hates a vacuum, etc…. etc……

    There really isn’t cause for alarm for Mitt until he drops below 27ish or someone pulls within 7. There is no need to panic until someone is within the MoE. Of course, you’re toast if he loses New Hampshire.

    …. but I tell you this because many of you are clearly naive, and some of your expectations are outpacing your understanding of politics. I don’t want your irrational exuberance to flip into irrational fear when the inevitable happens and New Hampshire gets closer.

  38. Matt "MWS" Says:

    CF,

    LOL! What are some of those things I’ve been “proven wrong” about?

    Mitt’s total awesomeness?

  39. CF Says:

    37

    You’re 0 for about 26 now on predictions. Incorrect speculation has become a painful addiction for you. It’s never too late to quit.

  40. Matthew E. Miller Says:

    Jonah Goldberg and Charles Krauthammer both just begged Ryan to get in and Krauthammer said “someone needs to get a posse to bring him in”. So I guess the search for a conservative savior continues apace. I do wonder though. A month ago, when the Ryan plan was still unknown, I thought he’d make an excellent candidate. It’s taken quite a beating since then. It’s true that he’s the only one that can sell his plan and it’s true that the GOP, especially at the congressional level, is going to effectively be running on the Ryan plan no matter who the nominee is, but it may just be too late to sell the Ryan Plan this cycle. If we’re going to do worse than we ought to at the congressional level, then maybe we need to be more cautious at the Presidential level. I mean, bold, but cautious if that makes any sense. If nominating Ryan could save a half dozen congressional seats and 2 Senate seats, but cost us 3 or 4 points at the Presidential level- versus a generic R- then maybe…? I don’t know. I’m no longer convinced the establishment- which normally is OK (better than the grassroots anyway) on evaluating electability- is right to try to recruit Ryan. It could turn out great and, if we’re going to lose with someone, he’s my top choice. But I’d much rather win with a Pawlenty than lose with Ryan and Ryan’s a fairly serious risk at this juncture.

  41. Matt "MWS" Says:

    CF,

    “You’re 0 for about 26 now on predictions.”

    Such as………………..?

  42. paul8148 Says:

    It going to be Huntersman vs. Romney till the death in NH. All the presss up there besides the Union Leader is raving Huntersman stump style. The Union Leader will do something like endorse Bachman that makes there paper as meanless as the paper in the bottom of peoples bird cages. But I think Romney wins in a squeler….

  43. Matthew E. Miller Says:

    I was a Romney supporter, here in fact- on this very site- through most of ’07 and I was BEGGING my fellow Romney supporters to stop with the “Mitt is leading HUGE in Iowa and NH. The nomination is in the bag”. Expectations matter. Had Romney finished second in Iowa and NH without having been the RUNAWAY FAVORITE for ages and ages, he probably would have been nominated. Because McCain was an awful primary candidate who even Romney could have beaten without the whole “wind out of the sails” after the Iowa and NH loses. Just a thought. I have high hopes for Mitt. Although it’s rather silly to say given the field, but he’s still my number 2. I’d hate to see him pump himself into the stratosphere again. That’s a warning to my fellow Pawlentians as well. Smack, it does T-Paw no favors- no favors at all- to make him THE FRONTRUNNER when he’s in single digits nationally and in the early states. Even Romney’s supporters weren’t that…misguided in ’08.

  44. Matt "MWS" Says:

    Matthew,

    Eh, you know how Rombots are. Everything is good news. His numbers only go up. His total awesomeness will soon be understood by everyone.

  45. Matt "MWS" Says:

    …….everyone will embrace mandates.

  46. CF Says:

    42

    2007-2008 was a completely different set of circumstances, which is why I have been saying all along that this Primary election is one of the LEAST volatile elections in years.

    Nobody had any idea that Guliani would be a complete flop at campaigning. Not only that, but he hadn’t stood his place in line like McCain did.

    Romney’s got everything going for him: A great campaign machine, he’s second in line, he’s vetted, he leads among those who say the economy is the most important issue (which happens to be THE most important issue), and he’s got the brains and experience to back it all up.

    He’s light years ahead of McCain in 2008. McCain ONLY had the second-in-line credential and that was STILL enough to win him the nomination. I don’t care what the moron pundits say, this race isn’t wide open, it’s been a Romney domination since the day he dropped out in 2008. I’ve been predicting this for 2 years.

  47. LV Says:

    #24 With all the talk about the Bushies trying to manipulate the primay it makes me want to rethink the 08′ primary and why Fred Thompson was such a reluctant candidate.

  48. CF Says:

    MWS
    “CF,
    “You’re 0 for about 26 now on predictions.”
    Such as………………..? everyone will embrace mandates.”

    You’ve just answered your own question.

    “Who would you never vote for?
    Palin – 57%
    Newt Gingrich 41%
    Michele Bachmann 34%
    Ron Paul 31%
    Rick Santorum 27%
    Herman Cain 26%
    Rudy Giuliani 26%
    Jon Huntsman 25%
    Gary Johnson 25%
    Tim Pawlenty 24%
    Mitt Romney 23%”

    So with all of Romney’s evil, evil mandates, he’s the one person people are LEAST likely to NEVER vote for. If there is another way to show how utterly wrong you are, I’d love to see it.

  49. New York for Romney 2012 Says:

    43. Matt “MWS” perfect candidate is Bob Dole 1996. Conservative but unelectable.

  50. LV Says:

    MSW and Adam X spend more time obsessing about Romney then they do supporting their own candidate….

  51. New York for Romney 2012 Says:

    49. They’re closet romney supporters, duh.

  52. New York for Romney 2012 Says:

    “Bill Clinton framed the narrative against Dole early, painting him as a mere clone of unpopular then-House Speaker Newt Gingrich, warning America that Dole would work in concert with the Republican Congress to slash popular social programs, like Medicare and Social Security, dubbed by Clinton as “Dole-Gingrich”.”

    Seem familiar, Ryan medicare plan?

  53. Jerald Says:

    Matt, I understand how “in the bag” supporters irritate you.

    Having said that, you’re constant “all Rombots” meme could also be considered irritating… ;)

  54. Jonathan Says:

    Well, I have to say this race is less fun when your candidate is not running…

  55. LV Says:

    Before there can be any medicare reform like in the Ryan proposal, they need to do something about medicare fraud….Same with Social Security.

  56. Matt "MWS" Says:

    CF,

    It would probably surprise you to know that Mitt currently leads among the 65% or so of New Hampshire Republicans who say they would “never” vote for a candidate who once supported health insurance mandates at the state level.

    That should give you an idea of how engaged voters are right now. But one has to wonder how those currently unengaged voters will respond when they learn their favorite candidate supports something they say they could never support. No doubt some will stand by Mitt. Others won’t.

  57. Metro Says:

    Boy, the Rombots have sure become unhinged today.

    I wonder why?

  58. Matt "MWS" Says:

    Jerald,

    I didn’t say “all Rombots,” just “Rombots.”

    I keep it ambiguous just to irritate you…… ;-)

  59. Jerald Says:

    Matt, thinking about it somemore, if you wheren’t such a RomNot, you should be refreshed by the few silly “in the bag” Rombots vis-a-vis the constant drone of the Craig for Huck, Palin of Arc, and T-Paw is Surging Smack types… :D

  60. Alvin Says:

    56,

    Because their candidate has a huge lead in a poll taken seven months before the voting starts and that means it is inevitable :) .

  61. Alvin Says:

    8,

    That is pretty astute analysis

  62. Alvin Says:

    “He’s got NH in the bag.”

    This actually made me chuckle. That is Keith Olbermann-esque hyperbole, but really just par for the course for you :) He does indeed have a pretty commanding lead, but it is May. Far be it for me to stand in the way of the dreaming taking place though. Maybe Pawlenty will drop out of the race tommorow and endorse Romney. It is inevitable!!

  63. Jonathan Says:

    Romney supporters don’t have any reason to be popping champaigne. On top of the obvious reason (seven months away, competition is relatively unknown, etc.), let’s remember what state we are talking about. If there is one state that refuses to do what it’s told to do, that tells the pollsters to stick it, it’s New Hampshire. Pat Buchanan and John McCain (twice) defied the odds and won the hearts and minds of the Granite State. Anything can happen in the New Hampshire primary, and anything usually happens.

  64. Matt "MWS" Says:

    Jonathan,

    Obama had New Hampshire in the bag too.

  65. Jonathan Says:

    #63:

    So did Bob Dole in 1988/1996, George W. Bush in 2000, Howard Dean in 2004, George H. W. Bush in 1980, and Ronald Reagan in 1976. Yeah, New Hampshire really loves voting the way they are told they should vote.

  66. Texas Conservative Says:

    Jonathan, #53

    Welcome to my world :(

  67. nowandlater Says:

    I have been recently convinced that I want Huntsman to win.

    Negatives:

    1. Worked as an ambassador for Obama. (Big whoop! Didn’t advocate policy).
    2. Support a state-based Cap and Trade.

    Positives:

    1. Media Darling (I don’t care what anyone says, that is a huge factor for the mindless middle) and very good under pressure and shooting from the hip; unlike Mitt or TPaw.
    2. Has closet Libertarian positions; For the Ryan Plan, No intervention in Libya, pro-civil unions, no individual mandates.
    3. Has Foreign experience.
    4. Has Business Experience.
    5. Has been a Governor.
    6. Pro Life and NRA.
    7. Has rich donor connections.
    8. Would appeal to the younger voter.

    Yeap, I think I am going to be a Huntsman. :)

  68. New York for Romney 2012 Says:

    64. They want to vote for him, it’s Mitt country :)

  69. Smack1968 Says:

    Good evening Gentlemen,

    I see we have TPAW getting a little bump in NH…very good….very good indeed.

    Does anybody have the FAVS/UNFAVS on this poll?

    Do they have this information on their crosstabs..if published?

  70. Texas Conservative Says:

    Brian Kilmeade was talking about Mitt Romney today on his radio show. Said we needed to forget the Romney of 2008 and focus on the Romney of 2012. Said to forget about his inconsistencies of the past.

  71. Matt "MWS" Says:

    now,

    “Yeap, I think I am going to be a Huntsman”

    I think it would actually be “Huntsmanman”. But since you’re the first here, we’d better be sure we get it right.

  72. Matt "MWS" Says:

    New York,

    “They want to vote for him, it’s Mitt country”

    Just like in ’08, right? :-)

  73. Jonathan Says:

    #69:

    Last week George Will said that the Romney of 2012 is captive to the Romney of 2008. He can’t escape from the 2008 campaign. And no offense to Brian Kilmeade, but Geore Will is a hell of a lot smarter about politics than Fox’s Sports guy.

  74. Adam X (Beat Romney First, Then Obama) Says:

    CF is right. Mitt has NH in the bag. Just like Rombots said he would in 2008.

  75. Matthew E. Miller Says:

    MWS,

    I like Huntsmanian.

  76. Smack1968 Says:

    MEM,

    Can you post the FAV/UNFAV numbers for this poll if they have them for us to see?

  77. Matt "MWS" Says:

    Matthew,

    That’s certainly less awkward.

  78. nowandlater Says:

    Huntsmaniac? LOL. I think he has all the ingredients. :)

    This how I see it. TPaw’s ethanol position hurts in Iowa. He will come in 3rd or 4th in the Iowa caucus behind a couple of the 2nd tier fire breathers — Bachman (with her ton of money) and Cain (based on passionate debating style).

    TPaw then can’t compete in N.H and drops out. The winner of the Iowa caucus gets no traction in N.H. because they are too reactionary. N.H. suddenly becomes, Mitt versus Huntsman (who over time transforms himself into the anti-Mitt). I think Huntsman will play very well in S.C. of all places. So Mitt doesn’t win a single state and Jon takes all his thunder.

  79. Matt "MWS" Says:

    And the most fanatical of his crew will be…….. Huntsmanian Devils!!!!

    Does he have any fanatics?

  80. Jonathan Says:

    #78:

    I think his people are fanatically unfanatical.

  81. Martha Says:

    Listen folks. I counted 2 Romney supporters who basically said Romney has it all wrapped up. 2 out of about 6-8. So you Romnots can settle down.

    Personally, I’m not counting any chickens until they’re hatched. Anything can happen, and I don’t want Romney out too far ahead too early.

  82. Matt "MWS" Says:

    now,

    “Huntsman (who over time transforms himself into the anti-Mitt)”

    That will be tough. Both have chiseled chins, wealthy parents, great hair, and special undergarments.

  83. Adam X (Beat Romney First, Then Obama) Says:

    I am all for T-Paw and I hate pandering – but even I will admit that his ethanol stance is going to hurt.

    I’m not at all convinced he can’t compete in NH though. A guy that can twice get elected in blue Minnesota certainly isn’t a cultural mismatch for NH. If T-Paw stresses his “truth” and “authenticity” it may well pay dividends in NH. After all, it did for McCain.

  84. Jon Huntsman for Obama Says:

    Smell the denial.

    Until I see TPaw above 15%, I am not going to worry about NH.

    The media will try to keep this election out of Mitt’s grasp.

    But it’s not going to work this time.

  85. Matt "MWS" Says:

    Adam,

    I think TPaw’s ethanol stance is not only realistic and necessary (and I am in the buckle of the corn belt), but it lends credibility when he says we need shared sacrifice.

    Even worthy programs are going to need to be cut.

  86. nowandlater Says:

    If Health Care is the big issue in the GOP Primary, the Jon will play the mandate card and can easily be the anti-Mitt. Plus, Jon is incredibly smooth in public and in one-on-one interview. Admittedly, Mitt is smarter, etc. but he ain’t got the touch and can’t shoot from the hip like Jon can.

  87. Alvin Says:

    80,

    Indeed. This is the first Huntsman supporter, not a person who likes him but one who has him as their first choice, that I’ve seen.

  88. ilfigo Says:

    Actually MWS, Huntsman is distancing himself from his Mormon heritage.

  89. thunder (Romne/Huckabee 2012) Says:

    # Martha Says:
    May 23rd, 2011 at 7:05 pm

    Listen folks. I counted 2 Romney supporters who basically said Romney has it all wrapped up. 2 out of about 6-8. So you Romnots can settle down.

    Personally, I’m not counting any chickens until they’re hatched. Anything can happen, and I don’t want Romney out too far ahead too early.
    ============================================================
    Hi Martha, long time no see. Its hard not to get excited when he is posting such good numbers.

  90. nowandlater Says:

    If this is the field to choose from then I am going with Huntsman. He’d be a better bet than TPaw. He can be a consensus candidate and has an electric media presence which TPaw lacks.

  91. Matt "MWS" Says:

    ilfigo,

    Really? I mean, I haven’t heard him talking about it, but is he really distancing himself from it? A recent article I read comparing and contrasting the two characterized Huntsman, not Romney, as being more reticent about his faith.

  92. nowandlater Says:

    Plus, he’s the most viable Libertarian running (the media missed the dog-whistles he sent to the Libertarians) which I find very attractive.

  93. Jonathan Says:

    #87:

    I need to hear more about Huntsman’s foreign policy views (his anti-Libya intervention stance worries me) and proof of his viability. If both of those conditions are met, then I’ll probably jump on the Huntsman campaign too. Pawlenty leaves me cold and Romney, I don’t know, there’s just something there, something intangible that just doesn’t feel right.

  94. Adam X (Beat Romney First, Then Obama) Says:

    85,

    I agree with all of that. And absolutely the national GOP audience LOVES to hear that sort of (for lack of a better term) “straight talk.”

    But don’t you also think that everyone likes to see government programs/subsidies cut…except for their OWN programs/subsidies?

    Admittedly it’s anecdotal, but even T-Paw today on Limbaugh said that there was virtually zero enthusiasm in the room when he talked about his ethanol stance in Des Moines.

    I hope this propels Pawlenty forward – but I’m not sure that it doesn’t hurt him more than it helps, at least in Iowa.

  95. Matt "MWS" Says:

    ilfigo,

    Oops. Sorry, I misread your post, and somehow saw “Romney” where I should have seen “Hunstman.”

    See how interchangeable they are? ;-)

  96. Martha Says:

    As a side note to you, Adam. I see that you’ve recently been accused on more than one occaision of being anti-Mormon or whatever. I know it’s not true. Sure you have said some things about how you believe all Romney supporters are Mormon, but nothing other than that. It’s easy to tell the people who have a problm with Mormonism, and you are clearly not one of them.

    As for your flip-flopping all over th place on Huck and Romney, that I can’t explain. It seemed like you despised Huck, if I remember right.

  97. nowandlater Says:

    Romney is the class nerd. Very smart knows his stuff (in this case the accounting nerd), but rubs you wrong and you wouldn’t naturally vote for him as class president.

  98. Matthew E. Miller Says:

    Huntsman has an electric media presence? The guy stands out about as well as Gary Johnson. The Huntsman hype is more amusing than the Daniels hype and about 10 times less likely to bare dividends. Bachmann, Palin, and Cain all have a better chance of being the nominee.

  99. Matt "MWS" Says:

    now,

    Mitt is the class nerd who desperately wants to be popular…..

  100. Martha Says:

    Thunder, I know what you mean. I’m cautiously optomistic.

  101. MarqueG (Heathen for Hermanator!) Says:

    Martha 81. Listen folks. I counted 2 Romney supporters who basically said Romney has it all wrapped up.

    You’ve got me, too, as a Romnot who will basically say that Willard has this whole thing so totally stitched together that my earnest suggestion, just between me and Mitt, is for him to run a clean-as-a-wistle front-porch campaign. Remain above the fray, you know? Keep your own counsel. Bide your time and whet your blackjack and wait for the right moment to spring on a nation eagerly shuddering in naked anticipation.

    Therein is the key to surefire victory. And he’s playing all his cards right even now: like a concert master stroking the catgut strings of his Stradivarius.

    It has all come together so masterfully, everyone else might as well pack up and go home, you might think. But Mitt finds them useful, as foils in his grand-master-funk strategery!

    Sic ‘em, Mitt! But only once you’ve got them in the state of dazed delirium that makes them vulnerable. I’m sure you get my drift, if you know what I mean.

  102. Adam X (Beat Romney First, Then Obama) Says:

    I don’t think anything resembling all Romney supporters are Mormon. I do think that most of Romney’s supporters on this blog are, though. For better, for worse, whatever. It doesn’t matter. I don’t care about any of the candidates’ religious affiliations.

    Now my primary concern always has been beating Obama. Even some of the Romney supporting detractors would have to concede that I was far more anti-Mitt than I ever was pro-Huck (when Mitt and Huck were the two biggest names in the race). My position was always that 80 percent of what our candidates do is going to be the same. Whether it’s Romney, Huckabee, etc.

    I was never a hardcore evangelical type. But earlier this year I suggested that pragmatically I thought Huckabee was our best shot at beating Obama because of Mitt’s mandate mishap and what I thought (and still think) will be an insurmountable hurdle to get the support of the base after 2 1/2 years of anti-mandate talk. Grassroors passion is what propelled Bush to victory in 2004 and Obama to victory in 2008. It was that simple. Pragmatism.

    For that I was tarred and feathered incessantly as some sort of anti-Mormon bigot by some of the Rombots. Now I never had any problem with Mormons, or LDS generally, but it has become sort of interesting how SOME perceive any slight against Romney to have something to do with religion and SOME are awfully finicky when it gets pointed out.

  103. nowandlater Says:

    Here you go….LOL. He’s going to take the “Likability” space and “Libertarian” space.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_rTtQkCdCM

    and as a bonus shooting pool, who could do this?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jnk7Sh_BRcg

  104. nowandlater Says:

    Matthew E. Miller,

    Here’s Mark Halperin’s assesment. I agree with him. He’s electric.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_rTtQkCdCM

    Here’s him shooting pool in N.H. He’s got the it factor.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jnk7Sh_BRcg

  105. Adam X (Beat Romney First, Then Obama) Says:

    I think all of the manufactured chatter about Huntsman only further demonstrated the rapidly waning influence of the GOP establishment.

    Cain, Bachmann and company have got to be licking their chops everytime they see some sort of manufactured story including Hunstman in the top tier.

    If were either of Cain or Bachmann I’d be giddy with laughter at how out of touch the DC/NYC axis is with the actual folks.

  106. ogrepete Says:

    Looks like Romney has a ceiling he needs to break through. I suspect that when Daniels, Gingrich and Giuliani drop off the pollsters list, his ceiling will be back up to 40%.

    His best news that he’s 1st or 2nd choice with over 50% of those polled.

  107. nowandlater Says:

    In the last minute Halperin says he thinks Jon Huntsman will be the next President of the United States. Woah, that is a bold prediction….

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036697/#43142979

  108. Michael Says:

    Huntsman will not be the next POTUS. Count on a Romney/Rubio ticket or a Pawlenty/Blackburn ticket

  109. Jon Huntsman for Obama Says:

    107

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

  110. Husky Says:

    let’s not forget that in 08, Romney raised a ton of money and immediately started running ads in Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina where he tried to get his name out there. He was burning through his money very quickly. This time he is raising more money (far more I suspect) and he hasnt run any ads yet. My point is that when the year goes on, I expect that Mitt will run ads in New Hampshire (lots and lots and lots of them) that will continue to solidify his lead. Oh, and I expect that he will run a zillion ads in the days leading up to the Iowa caucus making a push for a 1st or 2nd finish. TPaw will be broke after South Carolina, unable to compete with Mitt in Florida and beyond.

  111. hamaca Says:

    CF is an outlier.

  112. hamaca Says:

    109. He who laughs last, laughs best.

  113. New York for Romney 2012 Says:

    Just like in ’08, right?

    Mitt got 33 percent……….. Far above anyone else besides McCain.

  114. Matt "MWS" Says:

    New York,

    And that “besides” cost him the race.

    Does it bother you he’s at the same 33% in a field that is currently a bunch of no names, has beens, and nevers wases?

Leave a Reply

State of the Race


Obama Approval


Support R4'12

Meta

Recent Posts

Buy This Book

Categories

Archives

Search

Blogroll

Site Syndication

Main