It’s happened, folks: Rick Perry has hit single digits in a national poll:
Reuters/Ipsos National Republican Primary
Among Republicans and Independents:
- Romney – 21% (18)
- Cain – 19% (6)
- Paul – 12% (8)
- Perry – 9% (5)
- Gingrich – 7% (4)
- Bachmann – 5% (5)
- Huntsman – 2% (2)
- Don’t Know – 13% (18)
Republicans Only:
- Romney – 23%
- Cain – 19%
- Paul – 13%
- Perry – 10%
- Gingrich – 7%
- Bachmann – 5%
- Huntsman – 2%
Survey of 410 Republicans and 95 Independents was taken Oct 6-10 and has a margin of error of +/-4.8%. For whatever they’re worth, numbers from the previous Reuters/Ipsos poll taken at the beginning of June are in parentheses.
October 12th, 2011 at 4:08 pm
Need some more evidence that PPP polls are junk? Heh.
The much anticipated NBC/WSJ poll will be out this evening at 6:30 eastern time. That should give us a real clear picture of where the race stands.
October 12th, 2011 at 4:08 pm
The Pink Cowboy is toast.
October 12th, 2011 at 4:09 pm
Jeb Bush praises Mittens:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1011/65805.html#comments
October 12th, 2011 at 4:10 pm
Huntsman closes to within 7 of Perry.
SURGE!!!!!
October 12th, 2011 at 4:11 pm
Interesting that Bachmann is exactly where she “started” in June, before the hype and Ames.
October 12th, 2011 at 4:16 pm
#3. SWEET!
October 12th, 2011 at 4:17 pm
Hey, anyone hear from Craig (for losers)? The guy is MIA for a few days now??
Hmmm, Perry dives and Craig disappears….didn’t see that one coming (sarcasm intended)
October 12th, 2011 at 4:18 pm
wow – anti-Huntsman vote up to 98%… GOP must really hate that guy…
October 12th, 2011 at 4:18 pm
It’s time:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gb7nwoQVkQE&feature=related
October 12th, 2011 at 4:20 pm
All hat, no cattle.
October 12th, 2011 at 4:25 pm
It will be interesting to see how much Romney goes up after the Cain boomlet ends and after some more big endorsements roll out for Romney.
My guess is the most impactful people who have not already endorsed will wait and endorse in early to mid-December if they endorse at all. I am sure there are already quite a few others who just like Christie are already on board but are waiting to publicize the endorsement in a coordinated fashion.
Look for another big name the day of the debate next week. Any thoughts on who?
October 12th, 2011 at 4:28 pm
Ray,
Craig popped in on the “Evolving Strategies thread” to assure us that Perry’s money would save him.
October 12th, 2011 at 4:30 pm
Cue Craig for FOTM coming in and pointing out that Perry is up 4 points from the last time this poll was taken. In 3……..2……..1……..
October 12th, 2011 at 4:34 pm
All right, now.
It’s pretty clear that the Cain surge is real.
October 12th, 2011 at 4:39 pm
WOOOOOAAAAAAAHHHHHH!!! I CALLED IT FOLKS!!!
CF – September 21st, 2011 at 1:54 pm
I’m going to make a prediction that Perry will be in single digits this time next month and that Romney will be running away with the nomination. We’ll be laughing at ourselves that we even thought of Gun-toting Governor Gardisil as a threat.
Trends are in the air right now, Perry has lost his luster, he is deeply damaged and taking in water. His favorability matches that of Bachmann and Palin and history is about to repeat itself with this guy.
Watch.
http://race42012.com/2011/09/21/norm-coleman-endorses-romney/#comment-934838
Ya’ll called me crazy!! I was right on!
October 12th, 2011 at 4:44 pm
15 – Statistically tied with Cain (this poll) or Cain ahead (PPP) is hardly “running away with the nomination.”
We’ll see what happens. Perry in single digits is actually great news for conservatives who don’t want to see their vote distributed over several candidates.
October 12th, 2011 at 4:45 pm
14, Yes, the question is not whether it’s real but whether’s it’s sustainable. Right now it looks like Cain could actually win, but are we really going to elect someone with zero political experience for the first time in the nation’s history – that seems doubtful.
October 12th, 2011 at 4:45 pm
# teledude Says:
October 12th, 2011 at 4:18 pm
It’s time:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gb7nwoQVkQE&feature=related
==========================================================
That my friend is worth of five stars *****
October 12th, 2011 at 4:45 pm
I find it interesting that Perry did better with Republicans Only vs Republicans and Independents. I would have expected him to do much better with independents.
October 12th, 2011 at 4:45 pm
# John Mark Says:
October 12th, 2011 at 4:45 pm
14, Yes, the question is not whether it’s real but whether’s it’s sustainable. Right now it looks like Cain could actually win, but are we really going to elect someone with zero political experience for the first time in the nation’s history – that seems doubtful.
===========================================================
He has no money, no organization…. No Chance….
October 12th, 2011 at 4:46 pm
I’ve said this in other threads but I’ll say it again. Perry still has plenty of fight in him and he can still wound.
Let’s stay diligent.
October 12th, 2011 at 4:47 pm
I really don’t get the Cain polling. I don’t know how anyone can think he’d be able to handle being POTUS let alone winning.
October 12th, 2011 at 4:47 pm
Cough. Huckabee, Iowa, 2008.
Cain wins Iowa and the money will roll in.
Let’s see what happens.
October 12th, 2011 at 4:47 pm
WOOOOOHOOO!!!!
Perry’s in TROUBLE!!!
October 12th, 2011 at 4:48 pm
Cain is a placeholder for the ample anti-Mitt bloc.
It’s that simple.
We’ll see if he can stay afloat.
October 12th, 2011 at 4:49 pm
“I don’t have as much weight behind me as Chris Christie but I’m getting up there,” Bush said. “I’m going to wait. There’s no urgency to this.”
OMG….It’s Jeb getting Fat?
October 12th, 2011 at 4:51 pm
Sojourner Truth Says:
October 12th, 2011 at 4:47 pm
He has no money, no organization…. No Chance….
Cough. Huckabee, Iowa, 2008.
====================================================
Huckabee has a huge organization, they called it Hucks army, or do you not remember. Organizations don’t have to built with money, but they need to exist. Huck used churches and skirted the law to build an organization.
I don’t see the same thing coming from Cain (Perry is trying to do what Huckabee did, but he is no Huckabee).
October 12th, 2011 at 4:51 pm
Sojourner Truth Says:
October 12th, 2011 at 4:48 pm
I don’t know how anyone can think he’d be able to handle being POTUS let alone winning.
Cain is a placeholder for the ample anti-Mitt bloc.
=====================================================
But place holder for who?? Its too late for anyone else to get in.
October 12th, 2011 at 4:52 pm
Huckabee was a former governor for 10 years with much more of a connection to Evangelical voters.
Also, nobody else was competing in Iowa for the social conservative vote. McCain and Romney split the establishment/moderate wing and Thompson didn’t actively compete anywhere.
Perry and Bachmann will both be all in in Iowa and Perry at least will have enough money to crush Cain. Cain just gaffed today in an interview with Chuck Todd it won’t stop because he is unprepared.
Perry or Romney will win Iowa, most likely Perry.
October 12th, 2011 at 4:55 pm
28 – Place holder for ANYONE. Or if nothing else, a protest vote.
29 – Perry fell to single digits nationally. If the meme is that he’s done, those candidates will look elsewhere.
I have no idea how Iowa will turn out at this point.
October 12th, 2011 at 4:57 pm
I should say, those Perry supporters will look elsewhere…
October 12th, 2011 at 4:57 pm
The only remaining flavors of the month are Gingrich and Huntsman.
The speed daters are not going to Huntsman, ever. Cross him off.
So… the question is… will Newt ever get a date with the fickle bunch? If so, how long will it last?
And ultimately… where do all the fickle beasts end up?
October 12th, 2011 at 4:58 pm
I think that’s where they go next if Cain can’t *keep it up.*
His numbers, of course…
October 12th, 2011 at 4:59 pm
Perry has money and those super-PACs have money. Perry has a low enough burn rate that he will be able to buy himself positive media. That combined with the fact that Rush, Foxnews, Redstate and National Review are pushing Perry will ensure that voters give him as many looks as needed.
I don’t think Perry can beat Romney without huge errors on Romney’s part but I don’t think anybody else can permanently push Perry out of that spot.
October 12th, 2011 at 4:59 pm
… When the Tea Party is breaking for Cain, and when Rush, Levine, FOX, and most of the conservative media is trashing Romney and the entire Republican establishment ad nauseum, I’m starting to question why I’m a Republican.
October 12th, 2011 at 5:02 pm
Perry needs to exit the race so that CEO Cain can surge. T-Paw’s gotta be kicking himself.
October 12th, 2011 at 5:02 pm
35 – That’s funny. Because when Republicans trash ObamaCare and the individual mandate for two years, and then squander the best opportunity in a generation to install a genuine conservative as a nominee and draw stark contrasts with Obama by nominating the guy whose handlers met with Obama to discuss the best ways to implement ObamaCare….
…that’s when I question why I am a Republican.
October 12th, 2011 at 5:02 pm
I think in 4-5 weeks Romney will have moved to about 30 in national polls, Perry will be at 18-20 and Cain will fall back to Ron Paul and Gingrich level of 10-12%. Bachmann will stay in single digits and there will be a significant number of undecideds.
I also think people won’t drop out like in late 2007 because they will all hope to catch fire as the anti-Romney
October 12th, 2011 at 5:05 pm
32. Speed Daters. LOL!
October 12th, 2011 at 5:05 pm
Here’s a good article about the problems with 999
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/post/herman-cains-9-9-9-economic-plan-gets-lukewarm-reviews-from-conservatives/2011/10/12/gIQAzHEXfL_blog.html
October 12th, 2011 at 5:06 pm
# LV Says:
October 12th, 2011 at 4:59 pm
… When the Tea Party is breaking for Cain, and when Rush, Levine, FOX, and most of the conservative media is trashing Romney and the entire Republican establishment ad nauseum, I’m starting to question why I’m a Republican.
==============================================
Me too.. Its Romney or bust as far as I am concerned. None of the others cut the mustered.
October 12th, 2011 at 5:11 pm
Here’s a disturbing quote that supports what I’ve been saying over the past few days:
and here’s a more detailed article about the pros and cons of 999′s simplicity.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/post/the-beautiful-political-simplicity-of-cains-999-plan/2011/10/11/gIQA5aU1dL_blog.html
October 12th, 2011 at 5:18 pm
37. Part of the reason is that you were evidently politically born yesterday or something. Romney got little flack for his healthcare reform work in Mass. in 2007/8. Why? Because it wasn’t an issue. Republicans who aren’t Tea Party stupid are well aware that Romney drew heavily from conservative think-tank healthcare reform work calculated to counter with market based ideas the liberal reforms in Hilarycare.
Hating Obama’s down-your-throat legislative methods morphed into hating whatever was in his healthcare reforms, (which were virtually unknown until they were passed).
Surprise! He courageously stole some ideas from Romney, abandonded the more socialistic single-payer plan, and gave his toughest potential Republican opponent a black eye among the Republican under-educated.
Or those who, like you, were politically born in the last two years and want to pretend to be uber-conservative overlords to compensate for the newness of everything you run into.
You are going to be surprised, my friend, at how small your cohort is come election day.
Most of us read and weren’t born yesterday.
October 12th, 2011 at 5:19 pm
29. As an evangelical former Iowan, mark my words:
Rick Perry will not win Iowa.
October 12th, 2011 at 5:20 pm
Romney, Cain or Santorum will win Iowa.
October 12th, 2011 at 5:21 pm
#37….So who is this solid genuine far right wing conservative that is going to beat Obama?
October 12th, 2011 at 5:28 pm
No. It was because most conservatives don’t care what asinine legislation is enacted in a liberal haven like Massachusetts. Once the nifty idea had the potential to impact the entire nation, people started to rightfully notice.
The legislation enacted by the Wizard of Smart in Massachusetts is wreaking havoc on the state’s finances, not to mention that it’s just inherently wrong to force people to buy a product they may not want.
And to whatever extent the people in opposition to this lying pandering POS candidate is “small” it’s because of divided conservative opposition and Romney having to take a BS plurality path to the nomination. There is a reason that he keeps getting rejected, and it’s because he has statist tendancies and no political soul.
If Romney is the nominee I hope Obama wins or Trump or Palin launch a third party run. That way you and your ilk are taught a lesson.
October 12th, 2011 at 5:28 pm
What really slays me: somehow some of you think Perry’s Texas with its 25% uninsured is a market model for the Country!
25% standing outside of the market is a dismal market failure, and it costs us all tons and tons of money.
Your solutions? Texas is the model? Good freaking grief!
October 12th, 2011 at 5:29 pm
….#37….Sojourner Truth….This new Conservative movement in the Republican party is just a little too close to the John Birch society for me.
October 12th, 2011 at 5:29 pm
Not sure. But if Romney’s the nominee, the Republicans don’t deserve to beat Obama.
October 12th, 2011 at 5:30 pm
44 — Exactly why won’t Perry win Iowa?
October 12th, 2011 at 5:38 pm
#47/50-You are pathetic. I would take any one of the nominees over Obama. I somewhat respected other posts of yours I have read but you lose all credibility with the nonsense you just wrote.
October 12th, 2011 at 5:40 pm
52 – If our president is going to move the country in a more statist direction, or if we don’t know what the hell our president stands for because of a lifetime of political flip flops, I don’t want that president to have an (R) next to his name.
Republicans are going to gain the senate back anyway. With majorities in the senate and the House, the Tea Party dominated caucus in each chamber will keep Obama in check. With Romney at the helm there is no guarantee he won’t return to his early 2000′s technocratic self.
And that’s just not good enough.
October 12th, 2011 at 5:42 pm
51. Iowans identify, culturally, as northerners. Truthfully, there’s an anti-southern bias in Iowa, we look at the south as backward and uneducated. Perry has been exposed as a dolt, he fits the stereotype of a slow-witted southerner. While there are a lot of Evangelicals in Iowa, there are not many Baptists, Iowa evangelicals tend to be ‘non-denominational’ or reformed.
October 12th, 2011 at 5:44 pm
Huckabee is transcultural, no accent (unless he turns it on) and he’s sharp as a tack.
October 12th, 2011 at 5:45 pm
55 – That’s true. Huckabee didn’t have any kind of drawl.
And Arkansas isn’t quite the same as Texas.
October 12th, 2011 at 5:45 pm
53
There’s no guarantee Cain won’t go back to his Greenspan self. There’s no guarantee Gingrich won’t go back to his cap-and-trade self. There’s no guarantee Perry won’t go back to his corruption/illegal immigration self (oh wait, that’s today).
See we can play that game too.
October 12th, 2011 at 5:46 pm
14, Yes, the question is not whether it’s real but whether’s it’s sustainable. Right now it looks like Cain could actually win, but are we really going to elect someone with zero political experience for the first time in the nation’s history – that seems doubtful.
Not exactly the “first” time. Zachary Taylor, Ulysses S. Grant, Dwight Eisenhower. Kind of a mixed group; Eisenhower was a decent President; Grant was bad; Taylor didn’t serve long enough to draw any conclusions, but I think he could’ve been good.
October 12th, 2011 at 5:46 pm
#53 – Do you understand all of the fallout from having Obama in there for another 4 years? Supreme Court, Obamacare – don’t argue that Romney won’t do anything about it either because he will, taxes, etc. You are a fool if you believe Romney would do more damage to the country than Obama. Do you realize how stupid that sounds?
October 12th, 2011 at 5:52 pm
58, Yeah, okay, I thought I might be missing someone. Of course those all have one thing in common that Cain doesn’t – they were all military leaders.
October 12th, 2011 at 5:52 pm
This BS that there is some PERFECT WHITE KNIGHT CONSERVATIVE in this race pisses me off. EVERY SINGLE ONE of these guys have skeletons, and Conservative sins. The difference is is that Romney actually has a brain on his shoulders to go along with it.
October 12th, 2011 at 5:54 pm
Reread what I said. I’m far more worried about the damage Romney would do to the Republican brand, now that the Tea Party has resurrected it after four years in the wilderness (2006-2010).
And frankly, I’m not at all sure that Romney would be all that much better than Obama. Didn’t Romney balance the budget in Mass. by raising a billion dollars in fees? Didn’t Romney appoint pro-choicers to the court? Didn’t Romney donate to Planned Parenthood and say he’d “never waiver on a woman’s right to choose?” Didn’t Romney set the table for ObamaCare when his advisers met with Barry to discuss implementation of it?
Assume that Romney is marginally better on policy. Assume Obama gets an F and Romney gets a D.
Well if our guy is no better than a D on policy I say it’s best to preserve our brand in both chambers of congress, hold Obama accountable, make implementation of liberal policies impossible (just like the GOP did to Clinton in the 1990′s) and live to fight another day with a conservative nominee in 2016. And that way we can do it with our brand intact.
October 12th, 2011 at 5:56 pm
Isn’t Perry OWNING the fact that he’s not good on immigration? Isn’t his honesty doing him in?
Fact is, no one knows WHAT Mitt believes. Even the Rombot MassCon acknowledged that we might just be getting a Clinton-type triangulator with Mitt.
That’s good enough? In this environment? With Obama on the ropes?
No thanks.
October 12th, 2011 at 5:58 pm
47. ST, in fairness can you really blame all on that on Romney? He tried to remove some parts and was overridden. And, then the next governor changed it even further. How much of the problems in MA now are due to the changes vs Romney’s original version?
October 12th, 2011 at 5:59 pm
62
You’re more worried about the party than the country?
Do you realize that EVEN IF (which is VERY LIKELY) we have the Senate after 2012, NOTHING IS GOING TO GET DONE.
We need a REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT, or this country is DONE.
October 12th, 2011 at 6:02 pm
63
I said that it’s the WORST CASE SCENARIO, one which is only true if Romney truly does have no core, which I believe is DISTINCTLY inaccurate.
Romney wants to fix this country, and he knows how to do it. He is not going to sacrifice his belief in lower taxes, less regulation, and small government to get along with the Dumbocraps.
October 12th, 2011 at 6:02 pm
BTW, I think the answer about medical insurance mandate needs to be either:
You must have insurance
Or
If you don’t have insurance, you don’t get government funded health care (emergency or otherwise).
If you give people choice on insurance but you pay medical costs of uninsured, you’re essentially taxing people for healthcare anyway.
Since I don’t think we can get away with the inhumanity of letting the uninsured bleed to death, we’re probably going to need some kind of mandatory insurance. But, let’s do it with privatized options, not government run. Like auto insurance.
But, that’s still probably a state decision. Like auto insurance.
October 12th, 2011 at 6:04 pm
53. What legislative flip flops is Romney actually guilty of?
October 12th, 2011 at 6:04 pm
64 – Even for the sake of argument, say that that is true. I have an ideological problem with being forced to buy a product I do not want. I don’t think that the government ought to have that right. And to the Romney supporters that say, “Well Mass. voters like it”….so?
What if the day comes where a majority of the public thinks its a good idea for more government intervention? In fact, in 2008, once the stock market crashed, polling showed exactly that. Is it okay then for Mitt to enact more statist government intrusive policies? Sometimes the public gets it wrong, and that’s one benefit of having a constitutional republic over a pure democracy.
Mitt says he’d never implement his health care mandate on a national level. So we’re just going to take him at his word? What if public opinion changes? Does that make such a plan okay? I’m well aware of the constitutional concerns and equally well aware of how so-called “rights” magically appear. The “right to privacy” that isn’t there. The expansion of the commerce clause being another example. Is Mitt going to fight for conservatism when the rubber meets the road? Color me skeptical. Does he have any history of doing so? He has rhetoric, as we saw during the 2008 campaign, but not much more.
I just don’t trust Mitt. And I probably never will.
October 12th, 2011 at 6:05 pm
Somebody (Perry?) needs to run some ads illustrating the problems with 9-9-9. While it might be good for the country as a whole (I have no idea), some of the realities pointed out by Santorum need to be explained. Cain keeps saying 9-9-9 is not regressive and that the 9% national sales tax is off-set by the elimination of the payroll tax.
Run an ad showing retired people who’s income is below that which now requires they pay income tax. Since they are retired, they pay no payroll tax. So now, everything they purchase has an additional 9% tax imposed. Here in CA, that would be almost 20%! AND this retired couple would now be required to pay 9% income tax.
You accountants here; help me out. Wouldn’t that raise taxes 18% on the number of retirees who currently do not pay income or payroll taxes?
I can see 9-9-9 stimulating a huge barter, under-the-table, black market economy. 9-9-9 seems to help mature high wage earners who don’t need to purchase much. And it hurts small businesses who thrive on people purchasing expendable products and luxury goods.
I need help understanding 9-9-9 and so does America.
October 12th, 2011 at 6:06 pm
Off the top of my head, Romney told John Judis of TNR in 1994 that he would support John Chafee’s national health care bill which included an individual mandate. Clearly now he feels….differently. Whether it’s out of genuine conviction or political ambition, who knows? But he certainly was ready to implement the state level plan. That ought to at least give pause.
October 12th, 2011 at 6:07 pm
69
Are you serious? Do you actually believe that is a possibility? We’re going to have 55+ Republicans in the Senate, and a strong majority in the House. A President Romney would NEVER be able to pass a mandate, EVEN IF he wanted to. But hypotheticals aside, he has opposed a national mandate ever since passing Romneycare.
PLUS, federal mandates are going to be ruled unconstitutional next year. So forget about it.
October 12th, 2011 at 6:07 pm
#53. THAT is a pitch perfect example of intiectual dishonesty. WHY ON EARTH would Christie have endorsed THAT?? You are. LIAR Sojournor and if you go for Obama over ANY GOP candidate you deserve to burn in Hell for being selling your soul to the devil. Your reason is dishonest and if you and I were face to face, I’d curb stomp you, right here, right now.
October 12th, 2011 at 6:10 pm
62. re: Fees.
I would suggest that fees is a legitimate revenue raising tool.
NOT having fees for usage is actually a bit socialist, isn’t it?
Let’s build a public swimming pool. 10% of our population will use it. It will be free. 100% of the people pay for the pool with taxes. That’s socialist thinking.
But, charge the 10% of the people who use the pool fees for that use. That’s fair. And, it’s NOT a tax in disguise.
October 12th, 2011 at 6:10 pm
#69 But you ARE now forced to buy a product you don’t want–and it’s for SOMEONE ELSE. We are all forced to buy health care services for people who could afford to buy insurance for themselves or they would be on Medicaid.
We are forced to buy things all day everyday. Just not for ourselves.
October 12th, 2011 at 6:10 pm
69. Ok, you win. You have actually convinced me that you hate Romney with more emotion than the emotion with which many Romney supporters like him. Good job. Anyway, it seems that’s your intention.
October 12th, 2011 at 6:11 pm
I’ve got to go for dinner now, but I’ll be back.
October 12th, 2011 at 6:12 pm
62. Pro Choice vs Pro Life is the only legitimate flop you can lay on Mitt. And, he’s acknowledged it and explained the change.
The other charges have SOME truth to them but don’t really stand up to scrutiny.
October 12th, 2011 at 6:13 pm
Okay so curb stomping you would be a little harsh, but a Republican voting for Obama is almost treason. There is no possible way, even in your hellish mind and reality, that you can justify voting Obama over Romney. If you would, you are certainly a child of the Devil. I can’t think if a lighter way to describe it, sorry.
October 12th, 2011 at 6:18 pm
If Perry’s still in the race and sitting on a pile of dough and is a pit bull of a compaigner and is dedicated to winning, then he should slam the heck out of his current competition, Herman Cain. It’s Herman that’s running in Perry’s lane now.
Perry needs to focus on Cain, not Romney. Perry was beating Romney to smithereens until Perry beat himself and took his spot in the race.
October 12th, 2011 at 6:19 pm
Cain took Perry’s spot, that is. If Perry wants it back, kill Cain (politically speaking, that is.)
October 12th, 2011 at 6:22 pm
The question is whether these polls are showing Romney’s strength…
or the fact that Romney will be wiped out as soon as voters united behind a single choice to oppose him.
October 12th, 2011 at 6:33 pm
#82 So far they are not. The speed daters go all in for the flavor of the month (mixing metaphores, I know), but then when the alternative choice gets seriously vetted, they flee in horror.
See my #70. Cain’s put all his eggs in the 9-9-9 basket. No political office experience, was defeated in the one election he ran in. All anybody (I say Perry) has to do is run some ad showing that Cain breaks his pledge to not raise taxes and that 9-9-9 raises taxes on some poor people and lowers them for rich people and it’s all over for Cain.
In addition, Bloomberg’s not backing off that 9-9-9 is revenue nuetral. Yeah, yeah, Cain went on about his “assumptions,” but he has not made his assumptions public.
Cain is very vulnerable in many areas; so far no one’s gone on the attack but they are going to have to. Romney won’t do it or he looks like a mean racist. Some superPAC is going to have to step up.
If people back off Cain and move on to who……..? Newt. Then let the vetting on him begin.
October 12th, 2011 at 6:34 pm
NBC/WSJ Poll Released:
Cain 27
Mitt 23
It looks like Cain has legitimately taken the lead–or at least is tied at the top. He’s a breath of fresh air when compared to Perry. However, Mitt’s by far the best. It will be interesting to see how it goes going forward.
October 12th, 2011 at 6:40 pm
62
Isn’t it the goal of the pro-life folks to change the mind of the pro-choice people? If that’s true, abortion is NOT an issue. if it’s not true, then the pro-life people are frauds.
October 12th, 2011 at 6:40 pm
#83 What I was getting at – the polls all year have had Romney stuck in the low-mid 20s.
Meanwhile “Not Romney” – whether it’s Trump, Perry or Cain has shown the ability to draw in the low-mid 30s.
So what happens as the primaries unfold and lesser candidates begin dropping out? Will Romney benefit more, or “not Romney” (whoever that winds up being, likely Cain or Perry)?
It seems that the Romney boosters are assuming the nomination is in the bag, but I wouldn’t be so sure. Even in a three way race between Cain, Perry and Romney, Romney could still lose if he can’t grow his numbers more.
October 12th, 2011 at 6:42 pm
NBC/WSJ October Poll is out (http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/MSNBC/Sections/NEWS/A_Politics/October_Poll.pdf)
Candidate – 10/11 (8/11) {7/11}
[B]Herman Cain – 27 (5) {5}[B]
Mitt Romney – 23 (23) {30}
Rick Perry – 16 (38) {11}
Ron Paul – 11 (9) {9}
Newt Gingrich – 8 (5) {8}
Michele Bachmann – 5 (8) {16}
Jon Huntsman – 3 (2) {2}
Rick Santorum – 1 (3) {3}
Other – 0 (0) {2}
None – 1 (2) {2}
Not sure – 5 (5) {10}
ASKED ONLY OF REGISTERED VOTERS WHO SAY THEY WOULD VOTE IN THE
REPUBLICAN PRIMARY (N=336)
October 12th, 2011 at 6:43 pm
It looks like this Reuters/Ipsos poll is the outlier as the other three latest polls have Cain in the 28 to 30 range.
October 12th, 2011 at 6:45 pm
Sorry about the failed bold attempt there. Is it just regular html? I thought it was some other convention but couldn’t quite remember what it was supposed to be.
October 12th, 2011 at 6:46 pm
83. “…but then when the alternative choice gets seriously vetted, they flee in horror.”
Cain is different though.
Bachman didn’t sound competent, was frequently invisible, said several stupid things & was never an executive.
Perry is a corrupt sob with horrible immigration positions & the HPV mandate.
Cain? He sounds smart. He speaks well. He’s never invisible. He lives off soundbites. He’s been an executive. He has almost no record to get upset about. Cain has a very good chance of holding staying power better than the others have for three reasons: (1) He’s simply better than Bachman or Perry were, (2) His nonexistent political record is hard to poke holes in, & (3) the “flavor” voters have only bailed when their candidates looked bad–Cain is unlikely to look bad.
I predict it will be Cain & Romney until voting begins.
October 12th, 2011 at 6:59 pm
#90 Blood
I agree Cain is different, but he’s put all his eggs in the 9-9-9 basket. If someone shoots that down, Cain’s done.
See my #70. What does his plan mean for people? No one’s explained it in detail.
October 12th, 2011 at 7:04 pm
#90 I don’t believe Romney’s a slam drunk at all. But SOMEBODY is going to be the nominee and the non-Romneys are splitting the vote. Is Perry just going to let Cain have it or is he going to fight Cain to be the non-Romney?
All Perry needs to do is shoot holes in the 9-9-9 and Cain’s votes go to someone else. Back to Perry? Off to Newt?
October 12th, 2011 at 7:12 pm
91.
You’re absolutely right. 999 is a gimmick. It’s a great campaign idea, but it’s hollow in terms of real policy. First, it is an impossible idea–it absolutely will NEVER get voted in. It’s probably more absurd as a passable proposal than Obama’s new stimulus bill. Second, it really isn’t a very good plan. It actually hurts the aggregate demand, which is possibly our biggest economic problem right now. The only two groups that have studied it out (both conservative) said it’s basically a worthless concept.
However, right now few voters are really paying attention–they certainly aren’t deeply inspecting the policy proposals of the candidates. Cain’s plan is simple and he argues it well in soundbites. Combine that with the support he’ll receive from the MSM (who desperately want not-Romney in the general), and I think it’s unlikely his 999 plan will be exposed to the point that voters will pay attention. If it does, you’re right–he’ll be done. But I don’t think it will be until December at earliest.
October 12th, 2011 at 7:17 pm
#93 Well then, as I said, somebody needs to run a bunch of ads debunking 9-9-9 in a way that hits home with voters. It should be Perry but I don’t know that it will.
And it should be done sooner rather than later, before love for Cain gets set in granite.
October 12th, 2011 at 7:19 pm
Matt Coulter (1): “Need some more evidence that PPP polls are junk? Heh. The much anticipated NBC/WSJ poll will be out this evening at 6:30 eastern time. That should give us a real clear picture of where the race stands.”
It looks like NBC/WSJ confirms PPP, and it’s Reuters that’s the outlier.
I checked PPP over the whole year at RCP, and as far as Romney’s numbers are concerned, they in general agreement with the other polls released at the same time. The idea that PPP is deliberately under-reporting Romney is garbage.
October 12th, 2011 at 7:19 pm
92. “All Perry needs to do is shoot holes in the 9-9-9 and Cain’s votes go to someone else. Back to Perry? Off to Newt?”
Perry’s done. His campaign is over. It really is. He’s still relevant enough to do damage to other candidates, but he has no hope for personal success now.
Newt is the likely shift should Cain fail in a big, unexpected way. He’s already polling 10-15% pretty consistently now. But I don’t see Cain getting exposed. Perry could only do it through an ad & after the racist rock nonsense, I don’t see Perry going hard after a black man. If anyone topples Cain’s plan it will be Huntsman or Santorum–both know it’s absurd & both are intelligent critics. However, neither has enough incentive to hit him hard–certainly not with ads.
October 12th, 2011 at 7:22 pm
Part of the anti-999 ad could include Santorum’s asking last night’s audience if they were in favor of adding 9% sales tax to every new product in America? And not one hand went up.
In a time where all business people agree that we need stability and predictability, Cain’s plan ushers in a whole new level of unpredictability. Who can calculate all the dynamic ramifications? Cain claims he can but that’s putting a lot of faith in his “assumptions.”
If we’ve learned anything about life, there is ALWAYS the law of unintended consequences.
October 12th, 2011 at 7:25 pm
NBC/WSJ poll is awesome!
Only for the fact that people will keep trying to find someone other than Romney. It would be amazing if Cain does win the nomination. Imagine, we would nominate a CEO of a pizza company who has never held office!
That is crazy! Forget the idea that non-governors almost never win the nomination, we are going to blow that away.
October 12th, 2011 at 7:30 pm
94. “And it should be done sooner rather than later, before love for Cain gets set in granite.”
Everyone loves Cain. I’ll love him as I vote Romney and as I now consider his absurd 999 campaign gimmick. The love is already solidified. He’s a good guy and he’s just too easy to like.
That said, just because people will like him doesn’t meet they’ll believe in him. I love the guy. I just don’t believe he has a good plan and I don’t think he’s prepared to face Obama or be POTUS.
95. “It looks like NBC/WSJ confirms PPP, and it’s Reuters that’s the outlier.”
Not exactly. NBC/WSJ is closer to PPP on Cain’s numbers and closer to Reuters on Romney’s numbers. Overall, it’s closer to PPP, but not by much. WSJ has a 4-point Cain advantage compared to PPP (8-point Cain) and Reuters (3-point Romney).
October 12th, 2011 at 7:35 pm
NBC/WSJ poll has Cain over Romney 27 to 23, so the Cain surge is here.
As noted by many, this is evidence of the last death throws by the RomNots….the only remaining question is if the RomNots would prefer Obama over Romney in the general election. (We know Sojo is going with Satan’s third party run…
)
Cain taking the lead at this time is a good thing if you are a Rombot. It allows three months for Cain to get vetted…which is much better than if he started surging a month before the IA caucus. It also keeps Perry down and might suffocate him by sucking up all the oxygen. Cain is now forced to prove he deserves to be the front runner and that he is the best choice for the GOP nominee. If he shows up with a cold pizza, it’s all over.
If this sets Mitt up for a surprise win in IA, God Father’s will be delivering the pizzas to the Romney victory party in January…
October 12th, 2011 at 7:35 pm
“Part of the anti-999 ad could include Santorum’s asking last night’s audience if they were in favor of adding 9% sales tax to every new product in America? And not one hand went up.”
Yes, that was a powerful moment in the debate.
October 12th, 2011 at 7:45 pm
My impression of Cain as of date is that he’s gotten soft (not used to being challenged/having to explain himself to an audience that is not captive) being a talking head and agitator for several years.
He’s great at deflecting liberal attacks and appears to be an all around good guy, but he is sorely lacking the detail and breath of someone who is getting ready to hit the White House running.
It reminds me of Huckabee in 2008. He seems surprised by his sudden popularity and is not only not ready for it, but doesn’t know what to do about it.
The downside for Cain, and upside for Romney, is that Iowa is a caucus that requires a huge amount of preparation and a solid ground game.
Cain leading in the IA polls but then losing by a nose to Romney is a Rombot’s dream scenario–and in all likelihood could happen…
October 12th, 2011 at 7:51 pm
#97…Absolutely
Just trying to get the thing understood, debated, and accepted, let alone passed and implemented would take months, probably years, if ever, and would suck up all of Cain’s time and attention.
It would be Cain’s Obamacare as far is diverting his time and energy away from the urgent task at hand.
Remember Obama’s “shovel ready” promise?
Well, 999 would through businesses into uncertainty limbo for years without delivering anything in the meantime.
The question will be “Yes, Mr. Cain,” but what will you do for me NOW?
I much rather prefer Romney’s plan that includes an intense focus on the first 100 days…
October 12th, 2011 at 10:57 pm
I don’t think Cain can or will win this thing, but after the “American Idol” elections of 2008, I have learned to never underestimate the stupidity of the American electorate. If we can elect Obama, with no observable competence beyond uttering catchy and glowing phrases that inspire, we sure as hell can elect Cain, who tries, although to me less articulately, to do the same thing.
As to the thread, Newt is the only one left to fear for Romney. He’s smart like Mitt, can hold his own in any debate, and money may trickle his way if others get out soon enough. I wouldnt have thought this a month ago, but with no other Anti Mitts out there, the kook right may just opt for him(scarred and tattered past such as it is).
October 12th, 2011 at 11:58 pm
I think we’ll still see one more flavor spike before it’s over. Don’t know who it will be, though.
October 13th, 2011 at 12:21 am
Ha! We’re running rather low on flavors. Meanwhile, the Mitt Machine marches on without missing a beat.
People compare this race to 2007 w/Thompson and Rudy–and that Mitt could lose it like they did. No comparison IMO. Neither Rudy nor Thompson had done their homework. They thought they could waltz in and just take it–just like Perry and now Cain. And maybe Newt. I wouldn’t count on it.
October 13th, 2011 at 1:22 am
Interesting poll. It will be good to see Cain deflate in another month or so, then it’s down to the choice of Romney or Paul. Frankly, I can’t figure out why people like Romney over Paul in the first place, other than “he looks presidential”. Which is clearly retarded.
October 13th, 2011 at 1:52 am
107. Really? You don’t see the appeal of Romney over Paul?
Paul’s problem is that his ideas (regardless of merit) are just too far outside of what the majority consider palatable. He brings interesting ideas to the conversation and many of them should be carefully considered. And, he’s done a great job in moving the party in his direction.
But, he’s not gotten them far enough to be electable.
For me, some of Paul’s isolationism scares me and I don’t think it’s realistic in today’s world environment. I prefer Romney because
He’s electable
His views are center-right, so they have a good chance of getting passed by congress
He’s proven he’s a hard worker and can get things done
Paul is none of those things. But, he’s a man of principle with extreme ideas he believes in. He’s attracted a small but active and vocal following. I admire him for that. But, that’s not what I need in a President.
October 13th, 2011 at 5:04 am
108. He’s proven he’s a hard worker and can get things done
Paul has been elected for twelve terms now, and has tried to pass far more bills than the average congressman. Also being the major sponsor of auditing the Fed for a long time now, your third point is all but disregarded as biased ignorance.
Also, Paul is not an isolationist, but a non-interventionist. Trade and Talk with all other nations, but do not aid or involve yourself in their wars. If the idea of leaving the Middle East and the surrounding area to fight with each other instead of sending in thousands of our own citizens to die is “scary” to you, then I seriously have to question your mental sanity. Either you simply don’t have the facts about what’s really going on, or you’re in denial about them.
October 13th, 2011 at 7:32 am
Paul
-Strongly supports the 2nd Amendment.
-Strong on the economy, has predicted every boom and bust for the last 30 years. Also pointed out the causes of each so far as how they related to our government policies.
-Doesn’t support TARP bailouts of private businesses.
-Doesn’t flip-flop.
-Military service.
-Not great hair.
-Anti Obamacare.
-Doesn’t want to raise taxes.
Romney
-Strongly anti-2A, as evidenced by legislation he signed and spoke out about when he was governor.
-Mixed results on the economy. Got a good state (economically) and made it slightly better. Wins and losses as a businessman.
-Does support TARP bailouts of private businesses.
-Flip flops every time the wind changes.
-No military service.
-Really great hair.
-Anti Obamacare…sort of, except that it was his idea, and he implemented it on the state level over objections. Also is a big fan of government mandates that people buy/do something.
-Doesn’t want to raise taxes, but would prefer to call them fees (raised over 100 “fees” as governor).
Electable means people vote for him. So if you vote for him, just like that he’s electable. Total non-arguement. Kind of like the hair thing.
Romney is a weak candidate, and he can’t effectively attack Obama on the thing that will most motivate people to show up to the polls: Obamacare. Which means, even if he wins, poor results in getting Senate/House seats to flip to the republican side.
October 13th, 2011 at 8:21 am
110
The main issue is the economy in general.
You and I both know Obamacare is hurting the economy, big time.
… But… regular, average voters do not make the connection. The connection needs to be made for them.
Obamacare is going to be stuck down by the Supreme Court next year. So it’s going to end up being a non-issue.
October 13th, 2011 at 4:24 pm
109. I admit to bias and a level of ignorance.
My point about getting things done is that Paul rants and raises hell, but it seldom results in anything getting done.
With the issue of isolationism vs non-intervention, it’s a matter of balance and from what I’ve heard from Ron, he’s not balanced. He comes across to me as all or nothing. And, I personally think it’s ostrich in the sand to say we should never intervene.
There have got to be times where it’s in our best interest to take the fight over there to protect our interests over here.
I do think we overstepped this past decade. But, again, it’s about balance and truth or not, Ron Paul comes across as imbalanced (pun, but no insult, intended).