NBC / WSJ National Republican Primary Survey
- Romney – 28% (23)
- Cain – 27% (27)
- Gingrich – 13% (8)
- Paul – 10% (11)
- Perry – 10% (16)
- Bachmann – 4% (5)
- Santorum – 2% (1)
- Huntsman – * (3)
- Undecided – 4% (5)
If the only two choices were Romney and Perry:
- Romney – 62%
- Perry – 33%
Romney and Cain:
- Romney – 49%
- Cain – 48%
Survey of 248 registered Republicans was conducted Nov 2-5. Numbers from the October poll are in parentheses.
November 7th, 2011 at 8:51 pm
Romney will never break his 25% ceiling!
November 7th, 2011 at 8:51 pm
Huntsman surge!
November 7th, 2011 at 8:52 pm
Now we get a picture of what happens when the undecideds are forced to make a decision.
November 7th, 2011 at 8:53 pm
Yessss…
November 7th, 2011 at 8:56 pm
This poll is outdated as soon as it was released.
Today’s press conference will impact Cain’s numbers negatively. The question becomes where does his support go and how much does he lose. I’m hoping he doesn’t implode but is merely damaged.
November 7th, 2011 at 8:59 pm
Gingrich and Romney got the same bump (5%) in support in this poll.
Everyone else fell or held steady (except for Santorum, who doubled his support from 1% to 2%).
November 7th, 2011 at 9:01 pm
I should also note that this is registered republicans and a VERY, VERY small number of people polled. The margin of error is probably somewhere around 5% or more?
November 7th, 2011 at 9:02 pm
Well, Cain has peaked and today marks the beginning of the downhill slide…
November 7th, 2011 at 9:04 pm
Romney begins playing hard for Iowa in 3…2…1
November 7th, 2011 at 9:07 pm
#9 jerald,
You are late. He started playing this afternoon.
November 7th, 2011 at 9:08 pm
Cain’s turn at the top is over.
What’s the chance of Gingrich surging to the top?
More importantly (
), does Craig for Losers reemerge Newtered, assimulated by the Romborg (heaven forbid), or surfs out into the sunset never to be heard from again…
November 7th, 2011 at 9:09 pm
#10…Ci2Eye
On a scale of 1 to 4, I think he’s been shifting from 2nd to 3rd.
Question is, does he shift into 4th?
November 7th, 2011 at 9:12 pm
The fact that Romney is beating Perry like a rented mule makes my night.
Save a pretzel for the gas jet, Rick.
November 7th, 2011 at 9:17 pm
12 Jerald,
I think not. I think Romney needs to upshift but not appear to be trying to win Iowa. He needs to go the 3rd at best. If he tries to hard, he’ll get noticed and the Teavangelicals will launch an all-out ANTI-MITT assault in Iowa. He needs to keep a low enough profile to avoid that. It almost needs to be a stealth campaign in my opinion.
November 7th, 2011 at 9:29 pm
#14 Those are my thoughts exactly, Ci2Eye…
November 7th, 2011 at 9:32 pm
*****NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE STORM WARNING*****
*****UPDATE
SMACK…are you ready??
November 7th, 2011 at 9:41 pm
vetting (transitive verb): process by which Rombots unite to systematically tear down any candidate in opposition to His Royal Mittens by any and all means necessary.
November 7th, 2011 at 9:42 pm
Well, one could certainly hope…
November 7th, 2011 at 9:43 pm
Gingrich amasses largest South Carolina campaign footprint
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/11/07/gingrich-amasses-largest-south-carolina-campaign-footprint
Columbia, South Carolina (CNN) – Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich is building the largest campaign operation to date in South Carolina, hoping to seize conservative tea party support that could help keep his candidacy alive.
November 7th, 2011 at 9:45 pm
Another prime example of the pot calling the kettle black…
By this definition, Sojo has been “vetting” Romney for how many year’s now?
November 7th, 2011 at 9:49 pm
20 – I dunno. Seven? Eight?
How many years has Romney been running for president?
November 7th, 2011 at 9:50 pm
But at least I’m honest. I hate Mitt’s guts. I don’t want him to be president.
Would that the harcdcore Rombots just admit the same about ANY AND ALL CANDIDATES opposing Mittens…
November 7th, 2011 at 9:56 pm
Adam,
Someone has to look out for the best interests of the Party…….and of America. It’s not you doing this, so it has to be us.
November 7th, 2011 at 9:59 pm
“vetting (transitive verb): process by which Rombots unite to systematically tear down any candidate in opposition to His Royal Mittens by any and all means necessary.”
Vetting certainly has been to Mittens favor this go around. That said I’m not sure you can say Rombots are responsible showing that Bachmann is a complete nut, that Perry can’t string together coherent speech for extended periods of time, or that Cain now appears to be a creep. That just seems a bit too conspiratorial.
November 7th, 2011 at 9:59 pm
Elevating Mitt weakens the cause of conservatism because conservatism can only exist as a governing philosophy using the Republican Party as a vehicle.
Handing the keys of said vehicle to Mittens means that conservatives don’t have one of their own to drive.
And if conservatives aren’t even in the race then conservatives lose.
November 7th, 2011 at 10:00 pm
24 – It’s more like the Rombot glee, “Wait till the vetting.”
And then the “vetting” invariably leads to Rombot charges of corruption – because Rombots know they can’t credibly claim Mitt is conservative.
Hey that’s politics. Whatever. But let’s not pretend that the Rombot idea of “vetting” is anything other than systematic destruction (or the attempt to do so) of each and every other candidate.
November 7th, 2011 at 10:01 pm
#22 Sojo, I can’t speak for other “hardcore Rombots,” but I’m strongly convinced that Romney would do a better job as President than the other candidates–that’s why I support him.
Unlike you, I have no hate for any of the other candidates.
However, I strongly dislike Perry, and dislike Huntsman, but I would go for either of them over Obama. I’d be really worried that Perry would kill off the Republican Party by his performance except for the fact that he has no chance against Obama…
If Christie and Rubio had finished a term as governor and Ryan, Daniels, and some of the others that declined to run this time were running, it would be a hard choice for me…
November 7th, 2011 at 10:01 pm
You’re wrong, Sojourner.
You’re at least honest that you hate Mitt, but wrong that we Romney supporters hate all other candidates. Hate tears you down. We (mostly) think Romney is the best candidate we’ve got far and away and want him to win. I’m not gunning for someone to NOT be elected. I’m working FOR Romney to be elected.
The difference is you’re a hater. Haters hate. Pretty big waste of time, IMHO, but it’s your life.
November 7th, 2011 at 10:03 pm
22, Getting others to admit that your psychological projections are accurate might turn out to be a shallow victory, in the end, you’re still left that with that all consuming negative obsession.
November 7th, 2011 at 10:03 pm
Sojourner Hate..
I don’t hate the other candidates, even Perry, who is a criminal beyond words.
The only question remaining in this primary, other than, will the ABR crowd actually run to Newt, is…At what point does the Hermanator opt out, drop out or otherwise find a reason to endorse his good friend Mitt Romney?
Frankly, this will cause a tremor in the Tea Party like, well, like when Sarah chose not to run, and the nomination will be Romney’s. I hope he doesnt call it in before Iowa and New Hampshire, and preferably, not till after Florida.
November 7th, 2011 at 10:04 pm
Yeah? Well look around at the commentary over the past week of Rombot after Rombot playing judge and jury to Cain with zero evidence.
Look at the commentary when Perry was leading Mitt.
Look at the commentary from 2008 when Huckabee beat Mitt in Iowa.
There is PLENTY of hate among the Rombots.
November 7th, 2011 at 10:04 pm
Here’s the way I see it going down:
Now that there’s an on the record accuser, Cain loses about half of his support by mid-November. Let’s say Cain loses 15 of his 27 percent. So Cain moves down to 12 percent, just ahead of Ron Paul. Meanwhile, Gingrich takes two thirds of Cain’s defectors, so Newt moves 10 points up to 23 percent. Another 3 percent go to Perry, and 2 percent go to Romney to round out the former Cain voters. So as of Thanksgiving you have:
•Romney – 30%
•Gingrich – 23%
•Perry – 13%
•Cain – 12%
•Paul – 10%
•Bachmann – 4% (5)
•Santorum – 2% (1)
•Huntsman – * (3)
•Undecided – 4% (5)
Then between T-giving and X-mas comes the war on Newt. All of the old affair accusations surface, the flip flops (he was FOR the individual mandate before he was against it!), the general smarminess, etc. Newt loses about a third of his support by X-mas. So drop Newt 8 points to 15 percent, and give his former supporters back to Cain (4 percent) and Perry (4 percent). By X-mas the field looks like this:
•Romney – 30%
•Perry – 17%
•Cain – 16%
•Gingrich – 15%
•Paul – 10%
•Bachmann – 4% (5)
•Santorum – 2% (1)
•Huntsman – * (3)
•Undecided – 4% (5)
Romney wins IA, NH, SC, and FL with about a third of the vote and is the de facto nominee by February.
November 7th, 2011 at 10:05 pm
29 – Nah. It’s all good.
Just as soon as Romney loses.
November 7th, 2011 at 10:05 pm
SoJo, forgive me, but the alternative conservative universe you live in, complete with your own “My vetting and perspective are pristine, Rombot vetting and perspective is corrupt and evil” double standard just doesn’t make a lick of sense.
I’m sure you’ve got the controsions all figured out, but please forgive the rest of us if your “new math” just sounds like psychol-babble double-talk to us…
November 7th, 2011 at 10:06 pm
Perhaps Sojourner could look up Palestinians feelings on Israeli Jews.
Hating might get Palestinians big headlines on occasion, but they still live in a hellhole surrounded by people who think nothing of blowing themselves to bits in the hope that they can take a few “enemies” with them when they go. Hating builds nothing.
November 7th, 2011 at 10:06 pm
Yep. Feel the Rombot love during the Holiday Season…
November 7th, 2011 at 10:08 pm
34 – Hey dude. I OWN my feelings and admit them. Not everyone here is willing to admit the same about themselves.
Tarring and smearing is “vetting” to the Rombots.
November 7th, 2011 at 10:08 pm
Perry’s slide and Newt’s rise continues. The Texan’s bank account is really what’s keeping him alive; and $17 million is is not enough to go from primary to primary month after month. Romney’s in the driver’s seat in this nomination race, but until he starts accumulating delegates, he can’t take it easy.
November 7th, 2011 at 10:09 pm
#31 Sojo, appearently you only see what fits your meme and are conveniently blind to the fact there are two sides to every coin.
But as they say, that’s your problem,not ours…
November 7th, 2011 at 10:09 pm
DaveG – #32
That would be amazing if it went down that way. I’ve not allowed myself to believe Mitt could win Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina.
November 7th, 2011 at 10:10 pm
40 – Don’t worry. A few more polls and Dave G will readjust his predictions…
November 7th, 2011 at 10:10 pm
#32 Dave, that’s kind of how it is looking to me as well…
November 7th, 2011 at 10:12 pm
25. Your arguments are like if liberals started saying, “Herman Cain isn’t black. Cain is white.”
Then they made up a bunch of stuff to “support” their claims.
Then they got a whole bunch of TV and radio personalities to repeat their claim: Herman Cain is not a black man.
They would be vehement. They would call foul names upon anyone who dared show evidence that Cain is certainly black.
But, no matter how much they try to deny it or redefine what it means to be “black” it does not change the reality that Herman Cain is black.
THATs what it’s like to you, SoJo, and some of your friends, here, when you insist Romney is not conservative.
You just made up your own definition of “conservative” and decided Mitt doesn’t fit it.
But, you’re just as wrong as if you or the liberals tried to convince us all that Cain isn’t black.
November 7th, 2011 at 10:12 pm
31, First there was zero evidence because there were no named sources and no details now that a named source comes forward with all the gruesome details and we’re up to four sources, there’s no evidence because you don’t like the lawyer. There’s no proof but we’re not deciding whether to hang a man we’re deciding who to elect for president.
Also you confuse political opposition with hate. Just because opposing someone and hoping for their political demise means hating their guts to you, doesn’t mean the rest of us take politics so personally.
November 7th, 2011 at 10:14 pm
#32:
I just don’t think that the non-Romney wing of the GOP will let him get away with a win that easy. If Romney or Huckabee had had a clear shot at McCain on Super Tuesday last time, they most likely could’ve dragged out for at least another month.
I predict that Cain is out before the voting, Bachmann and Santorum are gone after Iowa, and Huntsman’s out after New Hampshire. South Carolina will eliminate either Gingrich or Perry and from Florida forward it will be a clear Romney v. Non-Romney race by Florida. Due to the fact that there isn’t a Super Tuesday after Florida, the race will drag out until probably March.
November 7th, 2011 at 10:14 pm
I think Cain will see a brief slump in the polls, but if all the information that is coming out about the accuser is true then he will probably bounce back up because people will start to suspect her credibility. Now, if other women come out and speak as well then that is a whole different ball game.
November 7th, 2011 at 10:14 pm
Oh I dunno. CF, Jax, Petunia, several others to name a few, seem to take this pretty personally…
November 7th, 2011 at 10:15 pm
John Mark – #44
Good post. Wanting one candidate to beat the rest doesn’t mean we hate the rest.
November 7th, 2011 at 10:16 pm
The head to head with Perry is the most interesting poll to me. Perry is finished. Even the Romney haters are unwilling to go with Perry over Romney.
November 7th, 2011 at 10:16 pm
43 – Most of the Rombots have given up even trying to call Mitt a conservative. Mitt’s “electable” and Mitt “isn’t a crazy Teavangelical” have been the latest pro-Mitt arguments.
And it’s little wonder why.
November 7th, 2011 at 10:18 pm
#32 – Dave G
One thing is rather sad, though, to me.
I wish Romney could garner more support in the Primaries than 1/3rd. I know that might be all it takes to win in a 7 or 8 candidate race, but it’d be nice to get 40% or 50% for the guy who is clearly the best prepared to be POTUS. Oh, well.
November 7th, 2011 at 10:18 pm
22 – Finally one of the RomNots tells the truth. This is about hate. Nothing else. Now why don’t you tell us why you HATE Romney SoJo?
November 7th, 2011 at 10:19 pm
“29 – Nah. It’s all good.
Just as soon as Romney loses.”
It’ll be a huge let-down for you if Romney loses. You don’t just stop eight years of hating someone guts over-night. You think you’ll be happy, but what will you do with the extra time, what will be your purpose? Now if Romney wins, on the other hand, you go on hating and your life will go on uninterrupted. Romney losing is the worst thing that could happen to you.
November 7th, 2011 at 10:20 pm
46. All WHAT information about the accuser?
November 7th, 2011 at 10:20 pm
31 – That is complete bullcrap. There is maybe one or two that have gone after Cain. Most people feel terrible for him or realize his reaction has been a mess. You need to seriously take a look at yourself. Your hate is tarnishing your perspective of reality.
November 7th, 2011 at 10:22 pm
50. That’s only because the extremists have attempted to co-op and redefine what it means to be conservative. And THAT definition is not something to be desired by clear thinking people (meaning US, not you).
November 7th, 2011 at 10:22 pm
More psycho-babble Sojo?
I think it’s an astute political assumtion that if Newt starts rising, the vetting will heat up, since that’s what happens to everybody, and only someone in denile or a dimwit would think that many of “the political vetting methods” used by people like yourself against Romney will not be used by somebody, not necessarily Rombots against Newt.
By the way, anybody here will to say that Sojo does not willfully and knowingly engage in trying to “tar and smear” Romney?
Is that what you mean by “owning up to your feelings” Sojo? Are you somehow trying to tell us that your attempts to “tar and smear” Romney are somehow “honorable” if you “own up to them” but that Romney supporters have no right to vet any other candidate, and that any such attempts, no matter how normal and pedestrian, are “tarring and smearing” if done by a Rombot and not directed at Romney?
Surely even you can see your “arguments” don’t have a leg to stand on…
November 7th, 2011 at 10:22 pm
37 – None of the Cain stuff is coming from anyone in the Romney camp. Stop with you lies. There isn’t an ounce of evidence to back that up at all.
November 7th, 2011 at 10:23 pm
#37 Tarring and smearing? Uh, no. The non-Mitts have fallen of the own accord. We might have pointed out the obvious, but as mere observers.
November 7th, 2011 at 10:23 pm
I think the biggest problem for these candidates are that they are vetting themselves. Bachman saying crazy things, Perry debating like a 3rd grader, Cain stumbling when under pressure, and Huntsman acting like a spoiled brat. The only ones that are acting like adults are Newt and Mitt. Thats probably why they will be the last 2 standing.
November 7th, 2011 at 10:24 pm
47, Indeed. I don’t mean to say no one else takes politics personally, that doesn’t mean they hate the other candidates guts. Some of them do, but you can’t prove that because of heated opposition directed toward other candidates.
November 7th, 2011 at 10:25 pm
45 – Who is the “Non-Romney”? I guarantee it won’t be Perry. Gingrich? Your theory has a huge hole in it. There has to be a non-Romney compelling enough to keep the race alive through the end of March. I don’t see it.
November 7th, 2011 at 10:25 pm
57 – Oh no. It’s going to come from the Rombots. Watch. I’ll remember this post.
58 – You’re ridiculous, dude. Just ridiculous.
November 7th, 2011 at 10:26 pm
54. She has a lien against her property. The IRS is after her. In september her assets were ordered to be seized by a judgment from a collections lawsuit. She has had multiple bankruptcies. She had 5 different jobs from 1993-1997. Some of this information was reported by ABC Chicago and the other can be found on various different sites that link to credible sources. But we will have to wait and see if it is true.
November 7th, 2011 at 10:26 pm
47 – Complete nonsense. Don’t drag me into your farcical lies. I have said consistently that I dont believe the Cain rumors are true. That doesn’t seem to keep you from smearing me though. You are scum, as always.
November 7th, 2011 at 10:27 pm
50 – Nonsense again. I have seen many posts on that very subject today alone. You sure like to make up facts.
November 7th, 2011 at 10:27 pm
Also owning your feelings and being completely honest about them might be overrated for a political blog – this isn’t Oprah. You just continually make yourself look like a jerk, stating your support of Satan over Romney, stating how you hate his guts. TMI…
November 7th, 2011 at 10:30 pm
63 – Nice comeback … any evidence to support your farcical lies? Where is the link between Romney and the vetting? It is one thing to HATE someone irrationally with no explanation. It is another to smear them with lies. How is that any better than the lies being told about Cain (probably from the Perry camp, as has been shown many times)?
November 7th, 2011 at 10:31 pm
Your time would be better spent by taking it to heart and fixing your emotional problem…
November 7th, 2011 at 10:33 pm
#62:
Herman Cain has been in the middle of a sexual harassment scandal for a week and his polls haven’t collapsed (yet). Gingrich’s scandals have been out there for 20 years; they’ve all been flogged to death by the press.
There’s no point in denying that there is a segment of the Republican base who will resist a Romney nomination until he’s the nominee. If we in the Romney camp (still weird saying that btw) prepare for residual resistence after the initial primaries, we won’t be nearly as surprised when it happens.
November 7th, 2011 at 10:33 pm
68 – Go ask your buddy CF (one of the Rombots whom you assert DIDN’T play judge and jury on Cain) what the threshold is for conviction.
November 7th, 2011 at 10:38 pm
So getting back to this poll….
…..good news for Mitt and his ROMBOTS.
This is a credible poll and it should make the ROMBOTS sleep better tonight. I have no issue with the sample size, even though it’s small, and I don’t have problem with it being registered voters and not Likley voters. Most polls are done in this fashion at this point of the race.
There is one glaring problem with this poll sample when it comes to the head to head match up with Obama and Romney. The sample is waaayayyy leftward.
46% is Very positive or somewhat positive toward Obama
40% is very negative or somewhat negative toward Obama.
No other major poll has that response….not even close. Obama only fares above water in this poll in regards to that question and no other poll.
That is why I think Obama has a 49% to 43% advantage over Romney in this poll…..the sample tilts heavy toward Liberals.
And because they have a General sample that tilts heavy toward the LIBS they might have the GOP sample tilt to Urban/Lib as well…which would favor Romney.
But all in all a good poll for Mitt.
November 7th, 2011 at 10:39 pm
71, If Rombots are to be defined by CF, then Romnots should also be defined by their most obnoxious commentator. Wait, that might be you anyway…
November 7th, 2011 at 10:44 pm
50, SoJo
Because it couldn’t possibly be because we’re sick of arguing that he IS conservative and we’d rather not deal with the naysayers… I think it’s safe to say most of us still feel that he is conservative, but we’ve given up on trying to convince you and the others here of that.
Regarding your other comments about Rombots tearing down candidates, etc., perhaps there are a few here that do that (there have definitely been a couple during this sexual harassment ordeal), but you generalize all of us into that category. Some of the Romney people here have been some of Cain’s biggest defenders over the last week. You take the words of a few of us, and apply them to all of us. I called Smack out on that and he said he would try to do better. I greatly appreciated that and would ask you to do the same.
November 7th, 2011 at 10:45 pm
70 – I agree it isn’t a lock for Romney. I just don’t see this being long a drawn out. I think if Romney wins New Hampshire, Nevada and Florida he locks up the nomination. No one else will be able to continue. If he loses either New Hampshire or Florida he is finished. I just can’t see Gingrich or Cain going the distance. In fact, I firmly believe neither of them ever intended to win this thing and are fans of Romney. Both of them have resisted attacking him when everyone else was. Gingrich has made a point of not going negative on anyone. I don’t see how he beats Romney without going negative on him.
There are enough Romney haters out there to make me think this is anything but a lock though. Frankly I am disgusted by it. I have yet to hear a single good explanation for the hate.
November 7th, 2011 at 10:46 pm
71 – Why should I care what CF thinks? I am not CF. I don’t know CF. I think CF says a lot of stupid stuff. Since when did CF become the representative Romney supporter here?
November 7th, 2011 at 10:47 pm
71 – And what the hell are you talking about with regards to me saying he didn’t play judge and jury? Do you know how to read, because I never said anything like that.
November 7th, 2011 at 10:50 pm
For RomNots to be lamenting a handful of Romney supporters reveling in Cain’s downfall is hillarious. As if they are above that or something. What morons!
November 7th, 2011 at 10:50 pm
I wish that were true SMACK, but as you mentioned, with this small of a sample size, all they have to do is hit a community that is Mitt-friendly and suddenly everything looks great….except that we really don’t know what the entire state thinks.
If they were to poll the different areas around the state with a good sample size in proportion to their GOP population, I would feel a little more reassured….
November 7th, 2011 at 10:52 pm
National polls are pretty irrelevant at this point. State polls are beginning to be important, but national polls aren’t ever really that important in Primary races.
November 7th, 2011 at 10:59 pm
Smack, I meant “country” thinks
November 7th, 2011 at 11:02 pm
In a weird way, the Gloria Allred lady may help Cain. She may be telling the truth, but……….maybe not. She’s kind of hard to believe. Those who support Cain will see this latest as a hideous attack on Cain (and it may well be).
The snake Gloria and the lady’s allegations will eclipse the real reasons why Cain is not ready for the WH.
November 7th, 2011 at 11:02 pm
State polls are more important, but this National poll should not be discounted. Yes, the sample size is small, but most polls right now are QTY 250-300. The PPP state polls that have been right on target for 2 years now only use QTY 250 -300. 250-300 polls have larger MOE but they can be handy in showing trends.
If another National Poll shows Mitt at about 28% in the next day or so, then it’s very good news for Mitt.
Will see if this poll gets confirmed.
November 7th, 2011 at 11:08 pm
more ‘stuff’
Report: Cain sought dinner date with fifth woman
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1111/67819.html
November 7th, 2011 at 11:09 pm
82, which is what I think might happen. If he doesn’t perform well at the foreign policy debate this week, perhaps it will make the news, but it probably won’t be as big, because of these allegations.
November 7th, 2011 at 11:13 pm
84, I think I might need to lock myself away from politics until this whole thing settles. I can’t take listening to it anymore. Someone come get me when this has all run its course…
November 7th, 2011 at 11:13 pm
Pretty good article about the accuser. http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-herman-cain-accuser-1108-20111108,0,4035523.story. Her fiancé was not told about the sexual harassment until friday night.
November 7th, 2011 at 11:14 pm
Smack, you seem more balanced. I hope that continues.
November 7th, 2011 at 11:15 pm
#75:
It’ll take a while if only for two purely practical reasons. First, all the early states either have proportional contests or, in the case of Florida, are having their delegate numbers halved; so simple mathematics says no one will get enough delegates in the first two months. Second, the fact that there isn’t a Super Tuesday right after Florida means that the state-by-state contests will give the fading candidates a glimmer of hope. “If I just campaign hard enough in this one state, I’ll be able to pull off an upset” will be the logic going into those places. Remember, in 2004 John Kerry swept every single primary except 2 (OK and SC if I remember right) yet John Edwards remained in the race. It wasn’t until Super Tuesday that being rejected in all those states on a single day that Edwards bowed out. Super Tuesday’s have a sort of finality to them that really just signals to the hanger-ons that it’s time to quit. Without that, they feel they can just keep going.
November 7th, 2011 at 11:15 pm
Kavon needs to set the clock back one hour on this website.
November 7th, 2011 at 11:17 pm
So Romney is beating Perry by nearly two to one in a head to head match up, yet the”grassroots” is doing all they can to try and kill all the other candidates because they assume that’s why Perry is doing so poorly. It’s been my assumption that a huge amount of GOP voters are leaning towards Romney, but they’re not ready to settle just yet. It’s very telling that when they’re forced to make a choice, they overwhelmingly back Romney over Perry.
Cain is not going to get the nomination, there’s simply been too many “fly by the seat of the pants” moments for him and the taint of scandal. It looks like most of his support will probably drift to Romney after it has time to digest.
A Romney nomination looks inevitable, it’s just a matter of how bruising a primary battle this becomes.
November 7th, 2011 at 11:23 pm
H.R.
When I say something positive about Mitt, or the race that he is in….I’m more balanced.
But when I’m touting evidence of the Newt surge, or if I challenge the image that the ROMBOTS have of Mitt….I’m deranged.
Tis the life of SMACKDADDY in the midst of ROMBOTS.
November 7th, 2011 at 11:37 pm
http://blogs.desmoinesregister.com/dmr/index.php/2010/11/16/gingrich-remaining-iowa-justices-should-resign/
Remember Social Conservatives in Iowa…..
Newt has fought for you when other National GOP leaders stayed quiet.
Newt has flipped and fought.
Mitt has flipped and flopped.
Newt 2012!!!
November 7th, 2011 at 11:43 pm
Peter Beinart:
On why Conservatives have found their man in Mitt Romney, and why they shouldn’t worry about Mitt not governing as a Conservative as President.
“If there’s one thing you know about Romney, it’s that he’s neither very principled nor very courageous. So you have nothing to worry about”
….hhuuummmmmmmmmm…
…aaaaand that should make me feel better?
BBBRRAAWWWWWAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!
November 7th, 2011 at 11:46 pm
It’s remarkable that undecideds are down to 4%, and the only positive movement is on the part of Mitt and Gingrich. In Iowa, one poll showed a plurality of Cain’s supporters going to Romney, followed not all that far behind by Gingrich…..IF said supporters felt constrained to go elsewhere.
This augurs well for Mitt in Iowa, since the Cain campaign has stalled, and is beginning its descent. We’ve already seen the numbers for Cain’s negatives go up and his favorables down. As this process proceeds, Romney will move into the 30′s.
If he wins Iowa, he will win Super Big in NH, then win SC. By this time, he will be in the 40′s or higher. After February will come the Coronation.
November 7th, 2011 at 11:49 pm
SMACK,
You underestimate us Rombots.
When you are being fair and levelheaded, we can understand your perspective even if we don’t agree (or are forced to agree).
But it’s a different story when your posts start setting off the Spin & Spam whistles…
November 7th, 2011 at 11:49 pm
Smack,
Beinert is a liberal Democrat, and by quoting him concerning Mitt, you’re spouting Obama’s talking points. As for how he will govern, Mitt will follow the 59-point plan.
He keeps his campaign promises.
November 7th, 2011 at 11:55 pm
76. Jax,
Sojo will say anything to keep a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints out of the White House.
The suffering and agony begins in just a few weeks away for the staunch anti-Romney crowd, which is extremely vocal but few in number.
November 7th, 2011 at 11:55 pm
88 – He must have taken his meds.
November 7th, 2011 at 11:56 pm
HERE is an example of what we MUST get out of the Oval Office ASAP:
November 7th, 2011 at 11:58 pm
92 – In otherwords, when you say deranged things you are deranged. When you are reasonable you seem sane. Don’t lie, and you won’t be called a lunatic.
November 7th, 2011 at 11:59 pm
This is the most absurd thing ever:
“Newt has flipped and fought.
Mitt has flipped and flopped.”
Do you think that is going to help you? It doesn’t even make sense.
November 8th, 2011 at 12:00 am
94 – Neither of which are true. He is very principled and has a long track record of doing exactly what he says he will do. Just another hater spewing lies.
November 8th, 2011 at 12:00 am
Keith Price,
Yep.
Just horrible.
If Obama loses 20% of the Jewish vote…in other words if Obama Jewish vote goes from 78% of the total jewish vote(2008) to 58% of the total Jewish vote…..then….then….
Obama loses 200,000 votes in Florida and 70,000 votes in PA.
So keep flaping your jaw Obama.
Moron!
November 8th, 2011 at 12:01 am
100-
Obama’s not only a clueless fool,, he’s also [EDITED].
November 8th, 2011 at 12:02 am
98 – I suspect the same thing. I just wish he would admit it, since he is so “honest” and all.
November 8th, 2011 at 12:04 am
98. HR. WHY would you do that? STOP bringing religion into this race.
November 8th, 2011 at 12:04 am
102 -it’s a very funny line, come on!
November 8th, 2011 at 12:05 am
Jax,
It’s too late in the night to get so mad at me…settle down.
I think you have an anger problem.
Do you strike out at people in fits of rage?
We have 50+ days until Iowa, and at this rate you are not ging to make it pal.
Your foot doesn’t always have to be on the Mitt gas pedal.
Do you think you could get along with anybody who wasn’t a ROMBORG?
November 8th, 2011 at 12:05 am
The fact that Obama doesn’t like Netanyahu is pretty well documented. Bibi is as conservative a PM as they have ever had. Obama is an ideologue. He hates conservatives. I don’t think many in his base will hold that against them. Hell, I bet there are plenty of Jews in America that feel the same way about Bibi.
November 8th, 2011 at 12:06 am
With that said, this is a major faux pas for Obama. It will hurt our relationship with our strongest ally. What a moron!
November 8th, 2011 at 12:06 am
109 – Not mad, just correcting mistakes (or lies).
November 8th, 2011 at 12:06 am
107 – Because it is true. Why do you try to cover it up?
November 8th, 2011 at 12:07 am
108 – Funny, if it wasn’t a lie.
November 8th, 2011 at 12:13 am
Hey I don’t mind playing judge and jury on Cain.
I did not want this to be true… my first response was that maybe the accusers were racially motivated.
But, four women and counting, and that one today was absolutely believable.
So, this isn’t a court where any one goes to jail. This is a court where someone has to prove they are worthy to be the President.
Abuse of power is not a trait I am looking for in a President, thank you very much.
And Cain has not sufficiently even answered the questions. He acts as though he has no obligation to me.
He does, if he wants me to hire him. He must answer all the questions, and the only way I have to ask the questions is the media and since the right wing media refuse to vet him what we have left is the left.
This whole fiasco has been a real eye opener about the corruption at FOXnews and talk radio. They are as corrupt as the left wing media.
November 8th, 2011 at 12:13 am
And ANOTHER reason Obama MUST go…
(from the Seal Commander of the team that got Bin Laden)
November 8th, 2011 at 12:16 am
Jax,
You like to think of yourself as the “Holder of Truth”, the one who decides who is lying or not, and what subjective statement is a lie and what statement is not.
You need to classify constantly what comments are lies and what aren’t to mask your insecruties in commenting on Politics…on Mitt…and other ROMBOT activities.
I tend to take it easy on you because you are innocent of your staements. You are too young to know any better. Someday when you are all grown up I, and others here, will take you more serious.
November 8th, 2011 at 12:16 am
114,
Take a chill pill Jaxemer. It’s a phrase entirely in the domain of opinion, it’s subjective and un-provable one way or the other If you can’t go two seconds without calling someone a liar for expressing an opinion you disagree with, you should consider a different hobby than politics.
November 8th, 2011 at 12:18 am
109. Jax, myself, and other Romney supporters actually enjoy having reasonable and fair discussions about Mitt.
But, too often you post lies, misrepresentations, and bombastic statements that make it hard keep our emotions in check.
It’s NOT, as you suggest, that you disagree or that you don’t support Romney. It’s that you are not having a fair conversation about it.
(Though I admit to being surprised at spurts of fairness from you. And NO, I don’t define “fair” as being “pro Romney”. I define it as posting truth, being reasonable about your responses to OUR truths, and not having a “nya nya nya nya nya nya” attitude. I also stipulate that some Romney supporters are guilty of the same on their side. But, I suggest it’s a real minority.)
November 8th, 2011 at 12:19 am
Keith Price,
That has too hurt Obama in some personal way once he reads this…right?
God, I hope so.
Obama is a prick of the highest order.
November 8th, 2011 at 12:22 am
#25 Sojourn,
I understand your position but the trouble is that apparently none of your puritians are capable of driving. With Mitt, he can at least drive and will head the car in the right direction. Granted, he may not get in the express lane and take you exactly where you want to be quickly but Obama is going in the opposite direction. With Mitt, we have someone that can take the wheel, turn the car around and get moving in the right direction. If, at some point and time in the future, you can find a hard core zealot that can actually get elected they’ll have far less distance to travel getting to the ultimate destination if we give Mitt the wheel rather than let Obama keep driving for another four years. And, I honestly believe you’d be surprised how far Mitt will move the car down that highway to conservative nirvana.
Remember, knowing which road to get on is only half of what’s needed. One also has to know how to control the car and avoid the obstacles to keep from crashing. Some of the puritans you might like behind the wheel are not skilled enough to avoid a crash.
November 8th, 2011 at 12:25 am
115. Petunia, What we STILL have are 3 anonymous accusers and 1 new accuser with a face and a name but a claim that absolutely cannot be defended by Cain.
12 years later, she claims she was alone in a car with Cain while he groped her and tried to get her to do more with him.
It’s still unproven and undefendable. It troubles me. She could say anything she wants and all Cain could say is, “that didn’t happen”. But, he can’t prove it. And, neither can she.
Maybe she got upset that he didn’t follow through and help her get a job.
She’s shown herself to have serious financial and credit problem. Apparently had a hard time holding a job. And, it’s POSSIBLE she’s out for some fame and money.
Of course it’s also possible Cain did it. But, it’s not fair because there’s no way he can prove he didn’t.
November 8th, 2011 at 12:26 am
119, Cry me a river, build a bridge and get over it. Politics involves penalties, but in Smack’s case they aren’t personal fouls. We have a whole field of pathetic candidates to whine about, we don’t need to whine about each other.
November 8th, 2011 at 12:26 am
122. His mistake was ever being alone with her. That’s just asking to get accused of something.
November 8th, 2011 at 12:28 am
Keith you have a good point there. I have said all along that Cain may be innocent, but the stories seem to show at the least a carelessness in guarding his reputation.
November 8th, 2011 at 12:29 am
I don’t post lies.
I don’t say Mitt has 3 eyes.
Give me an example of my lie…not opinion that you disagree with, but a lie.
I can tell you a lie that jax spread about TPAW that wasn’t true…even after I pointed it out to him he kept spreading it…. and so did many other ROMBOTS.
THE LIE:
TPAW once said that the ERA of small government is over.
TPAW never said that. TPAW talked about a David Brooks article that was called “ERA of small government is over.” in a speech. The Star & Tribune newspaper had to post a correction the next day that TPAW never said this outside of talking about the title of a David brooks article which TPAW disagreed with.
Do you know how many times ROMBOTS said TPAW actually said this as something he believe in?
So save your crap about how you ROMBOTS get upset about so-called lies when you spread em yourself.
November 8th, 2011 at 12:29 am
123. Smack was suggesting that Jax’s problem with him was that he wasn’t a RomBot. My response was that most of us have no problems having reasonable discussions with opponents. But, when it gets over the top, some folks react badly. That doesn’t mean it’s just because Smack isnt’ for Romney. It’s because he’s over the top, sometimes.
November 8th, 2011 at 12:31 am
126. Fair enough. I wasn’t here during those times. And, I’ve already admitted that Jax and some others can be just as over the top.
And, since I can’t recall any specific cases where you lied and I’m not about to go research it, I’ll concede the point.
(But, I’ll be watching you!
)
November 8th, 2011 at 12:42 am
127, I’m not going to argue that Smack isn’t over-the-top, just that he’s honest. Jax has demonstrated that he has a problem with anybody who holds a different opinion. He’s a smart guy, but he’s constantly calling people liars if he strongly disagrees with them. He seems incapable of separating ideas from people and understanding that ideas he hates can be held by sincere honest people. For example, I think Newt has shown evidence that he is a scumbag, with a rotten moral core, but that doesn’t mean I say Smack and Telly are liars when they say Newt has character – I just disagree. I think Smack is likely right that it’s a maturity thing. Jax seems like a smart guy with some really good ideas.
November 8th, 2011 at 12:47 am
I’d be a little over the top with all you guys if I actually thought there was anyone worth it. But due to my great cynicism I’m forced to play a role on the sidelines as a Ref.
November 8th, 2011 at 1:16 am
#126…Smack
I didn’t buy that, so don’t count me in.
But just one little example for you.
A few threads ago, you said Romney hardly did anything to fight gay marriage in his state when governor. We rightly told you that you were drunk
You then started cutting and pasting comments from some group and using it as somekind of proof that Mitt didn’t fight against it. You failed to give us any background and you failed to mention that it was about some later event not directly related to Romney’s initial fighting against the state supreme court and gay marriage—–all in an effort to prove that Romney never really fought against it.
You weren’t lying, but you were playing fast and loose with the context and the timing to try to “prove” that something that actually happened, didn’t.
That’s the kind of stuff we are talking about…
November 8th, 2011 at 3:02 am
129. Fair comment.
November 8th, 2011 at 3:03 am
131. Thanks, Jerald, for providing details where I had none.
November 8th, 2011 at 7:16 am
Wait for it
Wait for it
Romney SURGE!
NEWT SURGE!
Perry plummet!
November 8th, 2011 at 8:55 am
117 – LOL … you are funny. You are so much wiser and smarter than I, yet you can’t even spell.
November 8th, 2011 at 8:55 am
118 – Once again, I am not referring to his opinions. Thanks for the condescension though.
November 8th, 2011 at 8:56 am
119 – What are you talking about? What lies have I posted?
November 8th, 2011 at 8:56 am
119 – Oops … I read that wrong. Sorry
November 8th, 2011 at 8:59 am
126 – Ummm … wrong. Pawlenty did say that:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/jul/26/michele-bachmann/did-tim-pawlenty-say-era-small-government-over/
Nice try though.
November 8th, 2011 at 9:01 am
129 – Except he isn’t honest. Do I really need to prove this to you guys? This is not about opinion. Look at 126 alone. 126 is not true. Look at 139 for what the actual truth is.
November 8th, 2011 at 9:03 am
129 – You really need to check your facts before you go condemning me. I have no problem with Smack personally. We have had several nice conversations in the past when he is being honest. He isn’t honest. I can prove it to you if you want. You seem hell bent on defending him though, so I won’t.
November 8th, 2011 at 9:19 am
131 – What is the difference between lying and “playing fast and loose with the facts”?
Smack purposely stretches the truth in order to make Romney look like someone he isn’t. He does it all the time. How is that honest?
November 8th, 2011 at 3:38 pm
comeon folks, quit calling Romney a moderate. He comes from Utah, far and away the most conservitive state in the country. He has molded his image to be electable in Mass. Conservatives want candidates to act only their way. I am a conservative and I am ready to see what Romney can do.