Well, this is an interesting twist on things. Exactly one week ago, NBC/WSJ released a national Republican primary poll that we reported here at Race. In the midst of that survey, they identified 102 respondents who were willing to be re-contacted and re-surveyed one week later to see how the race was changing.
So the numbers below are how those 102 respondents answered a few days ago, and the numbers in parentheses are how they answered a week or so ago during the initial survey. Yes, the sample size is small, but doing a completely non-random sample is an interesting take on measuring how a race is changing — something that, to the best of my knowledge, hasn’t been done before.
NBC/WSJ National Republican Primary Re-Survey
- Romney – 32% (27)
- Cain – 27% (28)
- Gingrich – 22% (17)
- Paul – 9% (10)
- Perry – 4% (8)
- Bachmann – 2% (4)
- Santorum – 2% (4)
- Huntsman – 1% (1)
Initial survey of 102 Republican voters was taken as part of a larger survey on Nov 3-5. Re-survey was conducted Nov 10-12.
November 14th, 2011 at 10:25 am
Who wants to bet that Fox News does not report this poll?
Romney SURRRRRRRGGE!!!!
November 14th, 2011 at 10:26 am
Interesting….I wish they could have gotten a little bigger sample size but it’s still fun to look at.
Thanks for posting it.
November 14th, 2011 at 10:29 am
I just checked out photos of Michael Moore’s 10,000 square foot mansion on Torch Lake. If that’s not 1%, what is, especially in Michigan. Just by looking at the guy you can tell he’s not starving to death. Only in this era can a guy like that feign poverty and get away with it. Michael Moore pretty much makes up the 99% all by himself.
November 14th, 2011 at 10:29 am
Mitt R for president. Let’s get rid of the Nancy Pelosi corruption era.
November 14th, 2011 at 10:34 am
http://www.politico.com/2012-election/
Kellyann Conway Polling Company – GOP Iowa
Cain – 20%
Gingrich – 19%
Romney – 14%
Bachmann – 10%
Paul – 10%
Perry – 5%
Santorum – 4%
Huntman – 2%
Johnson – 1%
This new Iowa Poll confirms the other Iowa polls from last week that Mitt is stuck, as of now, in the Hawkeye State and that Newt is about to overtake a slipping Cain.
Now none of the last 3 published polls in Iowa have much in credentials, but because they are all telling the same story it might just might be telling all something.
November 14th, 2011 at 10:39 am
WHEN do they quit including those polling below 5% in the debates so that more than a minute can be used to answer a complex issue??
November 14th, 2011 at 10:42 am
Smack, It’s amazing to me, if Iowa is stuck on an evangelical mode of voting (which seems to be some people’s excuse as to why Romney lost and Huckabee won 4 years ago), that they would be choosing Newt. Se las vie.
What I find most interesting is that Cain didn’t drop that much, Perry, Bachmann and Santorum were all cut in half and split their votes between Romney and Gingrich. And they must have contacted a Huntsman relative…
November 14th, 2011 at 10:44 am
At least on a small sample it shows that as people start really paying attention they flow towards Mitt.
November 14th, 2011 at 10:47 am
It’s Perry’s margin that is striking to me
November 14th, 2011 at 10:48 am
@ppppolls
PublicPolicyPolling
Our national poll, out this afternoon, finds Newt Gingrich taking the lead in the GOP race.
November 14th, 2011 at 10:49 am
It is all a matter of when voters start paying attention. Just about everyone in the “not Romney” crowd is already paying attention, but 70% of GOP voters are not paying attention, and it is they who will determine the outcome of the primary race. The “not Romney because he’s a flip-flopper” crowd has already made their voice known.
That would mean only a small percentage of “not Romney” voters comprise the 70% who are not paying attention. Romney has already carried the day in face of current opposition. The “not Romney” crowd has nothing left but the hope that they can somehow convince 70% of GOP voters that they should “pick anyone but Romney.”
7 out of 10 GOP voters will start paying attention and then pick a candidate, and the stats show that Romney will carry the day when they make their choice.
November 14th, 2011 at 10:49 am
ppppolls PublicPolicyPolling
Rick Perry’s favorability with Republican primary voters nationally now: 35/49. Hard to recover from that.
November 14th, 2011 at 10:50 am
ppppolls PublicPolicyPolling
Michele Bachmann has fallen out of the top 5 in our national GOP polling which means we can finally drop her from general election polling
http://twitter.com/#!/ppppolls
November 14th, 2011 at 10:58 am
SMACK BREAKING NEWS!!!
SMACK BREAKING NEWS!!!
SMACK BREAKING NEWS!!!
The new National PPP Poll cooming out this afternoon finds the GOP has a new leader….
NEWT GINGRICH!!!!!!
YYYEEEEAAAAAASSSS!!!!!!!!!
Newt’s lead is proabaly statiscally insignificant, however to see Newt’s National numbers at the top of a pollster who’s track record has been nothing short of brillant in the last 2 years, will drive a positive news cycle toward the Newt Campagin and will also help drive the ever improving money drive that is quickly getting Newt’s coffers from red to black.
Now that we see Newt on top of at least one major polling outfit national poll samples, it’s time to see Newt get first place in Iowa in a major Poll…..come’on Iowa…forgive Newt.
Give Newt another look Iowa!!!
NEWT NATION rise up!!!
Today is our day…finally!!!!
The Gingrich Generation!!
Gingrich/Blackburn 2012!!!!
November 14th, 2011 at 11:02 am
It suddenly got very quiet around here for some reason………………..
November 14th, 2011 at 11:02 am
14.
This too will pass.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:04 am
14 – The spin in your post is making me dizzy.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:04 am
It’s just too bad newt will never be able to beat obama!
November 14th, 2011 at 11:04 am
18. EXACTLY!!!!
November 14th, 2011 at 11:06 am
Congratulations, Newt! You have won the prize: Flavor of the Month. What are you going to do now? Cruise the Gulf? Promote your book? Promote your wife’s movie?
Be careful, though. Everyone is going to get their knickers up in a bunch researching your past and dredging up the dirt… and boy what they have found! Let the tabloids strike a fever pitch.
/end disembodied third voice commentator at game show.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:06 am
If Newt really is the leader, it’s pretty clear that the so-called “base” is an awfully cheap date. Slap around the media a little bit, puff out your chest, and everything’s forgiven.
The good news for Newt in that poll is that with the likely pickup in fundraising as a result, he can cover his payments on that $500,000 Tiffany’s credit line.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:08 am
Let the mudslinging from the Mittheads commence….
November 14th, 2011 at 11:09 am
And the likelihood of Romney winning Iowa was never good.
The week before the vote the evangelical churches will do a huge anti-Mormon meeting and shame their members into voting against Romney. You can’t go to church and face your friends if you vote for Romney.
Iowa would have a chance at redeeming it’s self if it was a secret ballot, but it is much like card check. The elections are not free.
The churches there are much like unions. And the preachers have the same money motive. They get paid to oppose Romney.
Therefore, Iowa means nothing. And everyone has known that since at least 2008. So the damage to Mitt’s momentum is nothing.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:09 am
Newt is New Coke.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:10 am
Newt Coke if you will…
November 14th, 2011 at 11:13 am
newt? GOOD LUCK WITH THAT !!!
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2012/election_2012_presidential_election/2012_presidential_matchups
November 14th, 2011 at 11:13 am
Being the not-Romney in 2012 is like being the drummer for Spinal Tap.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:15 am
obama 50%
newt 38%
HUCKABOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM !!!
November 14th, 2011 at 11:15 am
Here we go again…..
The $500,000 Tiffany credit line is probably the worse attack I have ever seen a GOP supporter use against another candidate. So what if Newt has a $500,000 credit line at Tiffany’s? I see no point in that discussion. You don’t think Mitt has huge credit lines? Of course he does the man is successful as all get out. Credit line does not equal debt.
There is much to attack Newt on but to use Tiffany credit line makes you sound more like a OWS nut job than a proud Mitt supporter.
Get some new material Dave.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:18 am
23 — I heard that for the Republican party Iowa does have a secret ballot. It’s the Democrat’s caucus that doesn’t.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:20 am
#29 – Politics ain’t beanbag, Smack. All power to him. But if you can’t see the vain, preening, prickly blowhard that is Newt Gingrich, well…
November 14th, 2011 at 11:22 am
Who made this statement”" 1995,, ” American challenge in leading the world is compounded by our constitution, Citizens are going to re-think our constitution, or re-think our process of making decisions”. This was before the Council on Foreign Relations,(CFR), ONE WORLD ORDER. ??????
November 14th, 2011 at 11:23 am
The idea that people are looking for an alternative to the “flip flopping” Romney and they are seriously considering Newt just shows how shallow our electorate has become.
Newt will and has taken every side of virtually every issue in his career.
Let the vetting begin!
November 14th, 2011 at 11:25 am
Smaller GOVERNMENT, Who helped get the support to pass legistation, creating the DEPT of EDUCATION.???
Who under his leadership increase the spending on EDUCATION, by 3.5 BILLION dollars, the LARGEST single increase in the history of the Dept???
November 14th, 2011 at 11:25 am
The GOP does use a secret ballot in Iowa petunia….will that redeem Iowa in your eyes?…no of course of not.
Dave,
If you can’t see that you use a OWS line of attack on another GOP candidate then you..well..
I have a message for Mitt…..you better get your A$$ up to the Family Forum this Saturday in Iowa……you already skipped the Ronald Reagan dinner in Iowa last week.
1500 caucus goers are going to be at this forum…….Mitt, you can’t afford to skip it.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:27 am
Who backed and encourage the passage of THE VIOLET CRIME and LEA act” This placed restrictions on the 2nd amendement and right to possess a firearm, Suppress the 2nd amendement…????
November 14th, 2011 at 11:28 am
“Kellyann Conway Polling Company”
WHO!?
November 14th, 2011 at 11:28 am
Here they come…..
I love it!!!
Attack Mittheads attack!!!
Newt is not the flavor of the month. Newt is the Movement Conservative who will win the GOP nomination.
Once this race gets to a 1-on-1 contest between Newt & Mitt…Mitt is going down.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:29 am
35,
I suspect Mitt is potentially a bigger target for the OWS types than Newt.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:30 am
Who supported Al Gore and Nancy Pelosi’s Global warming .?????
November 14th, 2011 at 11:32 am
#38 – And how will “movement conservatives” feel about Newt cutting an ad with Nancy Pelosi on a highly political subject, attacking Paul Ryan when his budget plan was very much alive (prompting the DNC to use ads with his own words) etc.?
I’m hardly a Mitt-olyte, but Gingrich is just a farce…
November 14th, 2011 at 11:33 am
Republican Caucuses have a secret ballot, but we are allowed to discuss and debate our preferences before voting. Some people do show up somewhat undecided, but most come with their minds set on who they support.
The Democrats are totally corrupt, and use peer pressure and groupthink collectivism to overpower people and intimidate them. They also don’t believe in verifying voter I.D’s, and the real unreported scandal of 2008 was the bus loads of Chicagoan’s that stormed the Democrat Caucuses in eastern and central Iowa for Obama, physically taking over many of them and intimidating the Hillary and Edwards supporters. They couldn’t complain though…that would be racist!
There is a movement afoot with the OWS moonbats to try to ‘occupy’ the republican caucuses this time. I kinda hope they try it. heh heh
November 14th, 2011 at 11:34 am
Small ample size. Interesting concept though.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:34 am
who changed their wife three times?, Their religion?, And their Name??? It ain’t Romney…
November 14th, 2011 at 11:35 am
sample*
November 14th, 2011 at 11:36 am
5 – According to the jaxemer11 polling company, here are the Iowa results:
Romney – 75%
Everyone else – 25%.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:36 am
Newt Gingrich, movement conservative.
Heh.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:37 am
14 – Lucky Newt … he gets to be vetted now.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:37 am
Newt said that cutting that ad was stupid.
Newt said he was wrong on the question of mandates.
Newt has flipped and has admitted mistakes.
Mitt keeps defending Romneycare.
Mitt doesn’t truly believe he has fliiped and flopped on anything.
I will take the first guy…you can have the second guy.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:38 am
30
I don’t think so. It is a caucus… they debate and vote out in the open.
That’s how it went down in 2008. Plus, the numbers at each place are small enough to be able to tell anyway.
35. No Smack. I saw the hate in those people’s eyes last time. Nothing, nothing, will ever convince me they are not the heirs of the KKK.
I don’t think Romney is physically safe in Iowa and I wish he would just stay away… Iowa is one Republicans should just let go. They went for Obama last time… let them do it again. I want nothing to do with them.
I don’t think it is a secret ballot. At least not the kind where you show up at anytime all day and just vote your conscience. It is an arm twisting affair of a few people so you would know who voted for who.
There were reports last time of people who went planning to vote for Romney but their fellow church members were there and they said they couldn’t vote for Romney and go back to church.
That is so much like the unions I don’t know how it is even democracy.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:38 am
22 – the truth isn’t mudslinging. Get a dictionary.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:38 am
“There is a movement afoot with the OWS moonbats to try to ‘occupy’ the republican caucuses this time. I kinda hope they try it. heh heh”
That could be interesting… they might discover that Republicans do more with their guns then bitterly cling to them.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:40 am
41. Newt has explained his Pelosi ad and has been a very strong voice against the global warming fraud. Very strong. Much stronger than His Mittness.
Also, he didn’t attack the Ryan plan, he used some unfortunate language to make a point while being grilled in an interview. His explanation for that indecent is satisfactory, and to be honest, many of us were surprised at how fast the establishment went after him for what was really a minor gaffe.
It’s like the divorce papers on his wife’s death bed story…when you look into them they are really NOTHING.AT.ALL.
That doesn’t mean the Rombots won’t spout this nonsense 24/7.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:41 am
49 – More lies from liar Smack. I guess I shouldn’t expect anything different.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:41 am
52. I have found that clinging bitterly helps steady my aim somewhat.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:42 am
Smack-
I don’t know if you keep missing this every time it gets pointed out but I’ll try again.
There is a significant difference between the state level mandate in MA and a national mandate. The one in MA was approved the MA SC as perfectly legal. The national one, which Romney never supported and Newt did, has very dubious constitutional merit.
You are correct, Romney has not flipped on supporting his perfectly legal and constitutional plan. If he had, I suspect you would be hammering him for it. But Romney never supported the national mandate. That’s all Newt.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:42 am
53 – So all that crap you have been spewing about flip flopping was a load of crap?
November 14th, 2011 at 11:43 am
petunia,
“35. No Smack. I saw the hate in those people’s eyes last time. Nothing, nothing, will ever convince me they are not the heirs of the KKK.”
Please keep commenting petunia……
You do the ROMNOTS a world of good everytime you say something.
Keep going petunia…keep isolating the Romney supporters from the rest of the GOP voters….you did a great job on HOTAIR.COM in doing that…and you are doing the same here.
Keep going girl!
November 14th, 2011 at 11:43 am
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/11/14/cnn-poll-gingrich-soars-cain-drops/ New poll. Cain drops to third tied with Perry. Poll was taken pretty much during the same time period of the NBC poll, but the results are drastically different, especially with Cain and Perry’s numbers.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:43 am
Obama beats Newt 50-38. The democrats are absolutely salivating at the prospect of facing Newt. He can’t win the race.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:43 am
53 – How on earth was that not an attack on the Ryan plan? Try explaining that one away. Calling it “social engineering” isn’t really complimentary in any way.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:44 am
If this poll is at all accurate, it seems to indicate the top tier is separating from the pack. Romney and Gingrich are both moving up and all the second tier candidates with any support to lose are losing it. I’ve got to say Romney, Gingrich, and Cain is strange big three.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:44 am
Smack WANTS Newt Gingrich to be his/her next president? Utter chaos.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:44 am
Will Newt shopw at the Family Forum? That would be hypoctisy of thehighest order to have Newt be at a forum that focuses on the family.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:44 am
jax, why do you always have to go into personal attacks.
this really reflects poorly on you and the Mittness support base. Really.
Think before you post. These words you post are a reflection on you.
I am just here to help.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:45 am
Romney. Gingrich. Cain. I hate to state the obvious. But, I think a candidate is emerging.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:45 am
Boomer,
Yes, perfectly legal, perfectly stupid.
I have never said Romneycare was illegal…I just think the policy is horrible.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:45 am
The movements in the race are astounding. Meteoric rises and falls. And most of the movement has been generated by debate performance. Newt certainly owes his ascendency to his debates, which made him the alternative to the declining Cain.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:46 am
Some people just use extremes to get their point across. Jax is good.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:46 am
I kinda like Romney sometimes, but then I run into his mind numbed automatons and remember why I have such a hard time supporting a guy like that.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:46 am
49.
So Newt is a flipper and Romney isn’t. And you have stretched the truth again. Everyone can go to WhyRomney.com, to see how SMACK spreads lies…
Besides Newt will say anything for money.
Ask Newt’s wives if he should be trusted to ever keep his word. He must be about ready for a trade to a newer model about now. The word from a new book out is that he is pushing that book and running up the charge cards to keep Callista on board. I guess the aides who left him for Perry are spilling their guts.
Newt Gingrich convinced Congress that Freddie Mac was solvent. Without him we could have headed off the bank collapse.
That can never be undone. Newt’s ideas lead to trouble and he goes with the deepest pockets. He made $300,000, we got a depression.
Oh and as late as the Las Vegas debate he flat out lied about the mandate, until Romney forced him to come clean. I can’t understand how the media could just ignore that flat out lie in a debate like that… but there you go.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:47 am
Hey, three people in my fam finally got jobs last month. Maybe Obama isn’t so bad after all. Maybe change and hope is finally coming. Maybe Newt will be the next president.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:47 am
62. Ha! Gingrich, Cain, and Romney. Nostalgia, Diversity, and Competence.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:47 am
Maybe michael Moore is in excellent health.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:48 am
Sure why not. I’ve got no problem with Newt having his moment in the sun.
Do I think he will remain on top? Well, let me put it this way. Nobody else has stayed up there for very long. Once the serious vetting begins, they have all faltered. Maybe Newt will be different. Time will tell.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:49 am
Greg,
Yes, Newt will be at the Family Forum.
Do you want to disqulaify everybody who has made mistakes in their personal life?
You go right ahead……I have better things to do.
If Mitt is so perfect then he should show up..shouldn’t he?
If you all want to keep attacking Newt on a personal level…go right ahead.
Newt and the Newt Nation will stay positive.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:49 am
Newt represents the self-indulgent Baby Boomer generation that got us into this mess. Like a poster said, put a diaper on him and it looks natural. Self-serving generation.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:49 am
53. Yeah, sucks when people do that, doesn’t it? Yet, you’ve been (and still are) more than willing to do the same to Romney.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:49 am
Smack-
So you thing Newt Gingrich and the Heritage Organization were stupid for endorsing the plan in the case of Gingrich and helping to write in the case of the Heritage Foundation.
Is this what movement conservatives do? Support stupid legislation and then run away from it when it becomes politically damaging?
I think I’ll pass on supporting your movement conservative.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:50 am
#75 – Newt has been vetted. Romney has not.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:51 am
65 – No personal attacks … just the truth. A lie is a lie, and liars tell lies. I can’t help it that some people here like to lie.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:51 am
Well that didn’t take long….tele and I have been accused of spreading lies again.
Newt’s numbers must be rising!!!
November 14th, 2011 at 11:52 am
65 – You should take some of your own advice. Newt didn’t criticize the Ryan plan? Seriously? Think a little before you post.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:52 am
80:
newt vetted = 38%
obama vetted = 50%
Hello, Mcfly!
November 14th, 2011 at 11:53 am
Newt just doesn’t have staying power (and PPP has never put Mitt high in any of its polls). He has the most personal and professional baggage of any candidate in the race. Heck, he was forced out of government because of ethical problems. The guy has “scary” written all over him.
Smack, I honestly don’t know what you see in Gingrich. He’s never turned around anything, and he is a red-tape, Wahington bureucrat that is a career politician and lobbyist to the the highest bidder. What about that is attractive?
November 14th, 2011 at 11:53 am
It is such a relief for me that Newt is rising in the polls as he is. I still support Romney of course, however having Trump, Bachmann, Perry, or Cain ahead was always concerning. As a party, we CANNOT show significant support for, or nominate, any of those and expect to be taken seriously in an election. The GOP would be the national laughing stock.
With the current crop, even though Newt is a distant second for me, I am much more comfortable with him there, as the distance between him and the rest is huge. If Romney isn’t able to seal the deal, I could support Newt enthusiastically in the general.
The rest have turned out to be absolute disasters. I hope Newt remains as Mitt’s strongest competition throughout. Keep up the good work, Smack et al.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:53 am
67 – Did you think that when the Movement Conservative proposed it? Or when he defended it earlier this year?
November 14th, 2011 at 11:54 am
80. PabloZed, where has Newt been vetted? I haven’t seen many news stories on him. I haven’t seen any democratic ads against him. I haven’t seen any ads by other GOP candidates against him.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:54 am
70 – What an idiotic argument. Do you remember TEX?
November 14th, 2011 at 11:54 am
76.
Really? There’s some other guy on this site calling himself Smack1968 and he’s going around posting NEGATIVE stuff about Romney and his supporters. So, you’d better find him and tell him to stop it!
November 14th, 2011 at 11:54 am
And SMACK, Hot Air was purchased by Salem Communications… a Christian broadcasting network… and surprise surprise it is not against Mitt Romney, where before it was at least fair if not supporting him.
So it was more than me that made Hot Air a sell out to the almighty dollar.
But I can see the problem you would have being able to see it. Since you now support the guy whose opinions can be bought.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:54 am
Boomer,
Yes.
I think they were wrong.
And I have explained why many times here before.
just because others were wrong does not give Mitt the excuse to be wrong as well. And I also give Mitt low marks for his continued defense of his horrible policy.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:55 am
Hot Air is NOW against Romney, not NOT.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:56 am
80 – You might want to look up the meaning of the word “vetted” and try again.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:57 am
82 – Don’t lie and you won’t be accused of it.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:58 am
Gingrich will sink eventually he is more of a flipper than any of them. He was pushing the individual mandate and other things previosly that Obama wanted in his health bill. That is not constitutional at the national level. Gingrich has a lot of baggage.
November 14th, 2011 at 11:58 am
Wonder if Newt was in the group of those Congressman involved in insider trading that Abramoff talks of. I wouldn’t doubt it for a second. How did he make enough money to get a half million dollar credit line at Tiffany’s?
November 14th, 2011 at 11:59 am
80.
Ridiculous. Romney has now run for the Presidency twice and all that they have been able to do is attack him for “flip flops”, the MA health insurance plan, being a Mormon (yes, no matter how many times some people deny it this gets brought up all the time in overt and subtle ways) and putting his family dog in a car carrier on the roof of his car.
Newt has never run for national office before and lots of people have no idea about his record or his personal life. They will soon.
November 14th, 2011 at 12:00 pm
92 – Newt defended a health care mandate as recently as May of this year. What makes you believe he has suddenly seen the light? Where has he even said that he is against a mandate now? It sounds like you are just making stuff up.
November 14th, 2011 at 12:01 pm
92. So, if you felt Newt and the Heritage Foundation were wrong, why are you giving Newt a pass but not Mitt?
November 14th, 2011 at 12:01 pm
Newt has no political soul to speak of. I am not attacking him personally, but we know that he had dozens and dozens of ethical problems while being employed by the taxpayers of the U.S. He worked as a lobbyist for Freddie Mac, pushing the home loan business even when it wasn’t making any sense and was endangering our nation. He has been a big proponent of government spending by some of the least effective agencies (Education).
November 14th, 2011 at 12:02 pm
PabloZed,
68.
Totally agree. Newt has been able to take complete advantage of these. The fact that there have been so many has been to his benefit, too.
80.
I don’t think so. Yes, Newt have been vetted in a sense more than the other not-Romneys. However, he’s not been vetted as a frontrunner for the nomination. There may be a significant difference.
November 14th, 2011 at 12:02 pm
97,
That’s question is just……dumb.
Newt has written a million books, earns speaking fess, and likely made a ton working for Fox. Even Santorum made $200,000/ year for a weekly appearance on Greta’s show.
November 14th, 2011 at 12:03 pm
92 – Newt’s flip flop on the national individual mandate is much more politically motivated than anything Romney has changed positions on. Your arguments make no sense at all. Newt’s support of Romney’s plan was clear during THIS ELECTION CYCLE. In an interview in May he defended Romney. I think there was a subsequent debate where he defended RomneyCare too.
Do you even know what your “movement conservative”‘s position is?
November 14th, 2011 at 12:03 pm
“Wonder if Newt was in the group of those Congressman involved in insider trading that Abramoff talks of. I wouldn’t doubt it for a second. How did he make enough money to get a half million dollar credit line at Tiffany’s?”
jax,
you are the last person to scold people for what they put up here on RACE42012.
What you just did was mudsling…you have no idea what you just said was the truth.
You are a nervous little boy who is about to collapse under the weight of the NEWT SURGE!!!
November 14th, 2011 at 12:04 pm
“I kinda like Romney sometimes, but then I run into his mind numbed automatons and remember why I have such a hard time supporting a guy like that.”
No offense, but a former Palinbot such as yourself should be able to see the irony in that comment. I will say, though that Jax has become particularly annoying as of late. He seems to feel that he has been anointed as the great arbiter of objective truth. If he wrote his own bio it would be something like this: “In a treacherous world of lies, and deceit, but one man has the truth – the great jaxemer11. Will the truth prevail or will the powers of darkness embodied by Smack and Teledude spread over the land?” Okay, so maybe it’s more amusing than annoying.
November 14th, 2011 at 12:05 pm
103 – No it isn’t. Newt left Congress in shame with a $300,000 ethics fine on his record. What makes you think he is so honorable as to not participate in the trading that Abramoff spoke of. He said that he personally knew of 100+ members that were engaging in it.
November 14th, 2011 at 12:05 pm
105 – I didn’t say it was true. It was a question. Do you know what the difference is? It doesn’t seem like it.
November 14th, 2011 at 12:06 pm
106 – Just because you don’t believe in objective truth doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.
November 14th, 2011 at 12:08 pm
70.
Oh please. Yes, certain Rombots are bad. But on average they are much more willing to give props and make objective observations regarding other candidates than you Palin supporters and the current Romnots on Hotair, Townhall, etc. Not even close.
If you let a few bozos influence your vote that much, you have issues, dude.
Anytime a poll comes out showing Romney doing well, half of the dissenters are often Rombots showing an ability to be somewhat objective, as opposed to a majority of supporters of other candidates.
November 14th, 2011 at 12:08 pm
Wow…the Newt crowd will explain away all of his flipflops and conservative betrayals with ease…”Rightwing Social Engineering” anyone…please, if these words had come out of Mitt’s mouth in the last 6 months it would be considered as the ultimate betrayal…but with Newt? I’m shocked that Tele just explains it away as if it’s nothing…what about NY23, what about global warming…what about his comments about the constitution? I thought you loved certain things about Palin like purity and a complete rejection of RHINOism…Nope, as long as it isn’t Romney who’s flipping and showing inconsistency then you’re down.
This primary has never been about “conservative purity” it is only about Romney. You all love to look back and see something Romney said in 94′ and hold his feet to the fire, but as long as the betrayals and flipflops happened in the last six months and their name isn’t Mitt…
Crazy that the ABR crowd has to settle on someone who’s flipped flopped on GW, Medicare, and most importantly “Madates”…(doesn’t that damage your Romneycare attack a little?) Oh wait Newt was pushing for Mandates at the Fereal level and not the state level…oops, I guess you can continue to fight Romneycare since he only wanted it for Mass.
November will belong to Newt, but December will be ALL about Romney…get ready for Mitt’s media Bomb…he’s saving his closing sale for when it will matter most!
November 14th, 2011 at 12:12 pm
I usually agree with you, but not here. You can’t just “ask a question” with a charge like that imbedded. Imagine the same type of “question” being asked of Romney. You’d rightfully aggressively push back–in fact it happens a lot and you have rightfully pushed back.
November 14th, 2011 at 12:14 pm
Gordon,
Big differences.
Mitt is the only one who still defends state indiviual mandates…period!
Mitt is the only one who still defends MASS CARE.
Do you want me to give Mitt props for not flipping on this issue?….ok…you got it.
But Mass Care is a failure…and Mitt was the Governor who put it into place. And he is the man who is defending it. And will lose because of it.
November 14th, 2011 at 12:15 pm
Doesn’t sound like there is much a competition of ideas around here. Just mudslinging.
I said Newt has been vetted because we know more about him than anyone – personally and professionally. I am not defending or promoting him, just making an observation.
November 14th, 2011 at 12:15 pm
109, Really Jax? If I don’t believe you, I don’t believe in objective truth? There’s one Man I call the Truth and He doesn’t blog on r4’12.
November 14th, 2011 at 12:22 pm
114.
You and other political junkies may know a lot about Gingrich. The average voter does not.
They know he was Speaker of the House and he’s a very good debater but that’s about it.
November 14th, 2011 at 12:25 pm
112 – You don’t think it should be asked? Newt was there during Abramoff’s heyday. He was never seriously questioned about it when it all came to light because he had resigned several years earlier. Do you honestly think we shouldn’t know what the connections between Newt and the improprieties that Abramoff described were? It was under Newt’s watch that all this stuff was going on.
Even if his hands are entirely clean, he was the leader of Republicans in Congress. Shouldn’t he have known what his caucus was doing?
November 14th, 2011 at 12:27 pm
My 2 cents: For those supporting Cain because he is not a “politician”, if you are considering switching, why would you consider Newt Gingrich, the ultimate insider? Consider that Mitt Romney served without taking a salary as CEO of Cain & Co, as CEO of Salt Lake Winter Olympics, and as Governor of Massachusetts, while Newt is singled out by that den of thieves Congress and fined for ethics violations, and takes money from Freddie Mac for ostensibly telling them to stop making risky loans. I’m still waiting for a good reason to support Newt Gingrich. Newt’s history suggests Newt does things for one reason: to make Newt richer, more powerful, and more liked. Sounds like a politician to me.
November 14th, 2011 at 12:27 pm
113
We’ll see. Remember this statement after the first 5 states.
November 14th, 2011 at 12:28 pm
113 – Show me where Newt has said that state level mandates are something that he opposes.
Here is the link where Newt supports the mandate (from May of this year):
http://townhall.com/video/newt-gingrich-supports-individual-mandate
It is a video, so you can know it is from him.
Where has he said he no longer supports it and why do you think his change of heart is believable?
November 14th, 2011 at 12:29 pm
115 – You seem to think everything here is opinion. When someone claims an untruth as a fact, that is called a lie. It is not an opinion. These things are not subjective.
November 14th, 2011 at 12:29 pm
Smack…fair points on healthcare and YOUR personal opinion on the “mandate question”…but as Rombots we have every right to use this as a legitimate argument against the ABR’s and particularly Newt. Just because you see a wide gulf of difference between their positions, many of us don’t. When Romney crafted a healthcare solution he specifically brought the Heritage Foundation to the table so that conservatives would have a seat at the table. The Mandate was their idea and thier creation…isn’t that at least somenting to consider when looking at this discussion. If the “grand conservative idea” to battle socialized medicine had never been thought up and promoted heavily by Newt throught the 90′s…well, we’ll never know.
If Romney’s 94 senatorial campaign is such a sellng point for ABR’s concerning his flipflops, then we will gladly go back to the 90′s to point out all of Newts betrayals to conservatism…of course.
Thanks for the reply Smack…
November 14th, 2011 at 12:30 pm
118 – Because they don’t believe anything they say. They have been convinced that Mitt is the devil, and will support anyone that looks like the can stop him regardless of how hypocritical it makes them.
November 14th, 2011 at 12:32 pm
117. If there’s smoke, it should be asked–of course. But not if it’s out of the blue. Has there been any serious suggestion whatsoever that Newt had involvement? If not, you’re pulling it out of thin air.
If there have been articles from reputable media that Newt may have been involved, then I’d certainly concede your point in asking.
November 14th, 2011 at 12:33 pm
124 – I don’t know why you think there is no smoke. Abramoff has been connected to many members of Newt’s caucus. Abramoff claims he had over 100 members in his pocket. Newt left congress in shame with a $300K ethics fine.
If that isn’t smoke, then what is?
November 14th, 2011 at 12:33 pm
118
Answer: It’s never been about “career politicians” or “establishment candidates”, or any of that with the far right. It’s never been about health care, it’s never been about flip-flops, or his dog on his roof, or illegals on his lawn, it’s never been about anything they’ve stated as their problem with Romney.
When they’ve switched their support from such a vast array of candidates, it becomes obvious at some point that they’ve all held positions that they “stated” they disliked about Romney.
November 14th, 2011 at 12:34 pm
124 – Why would there be articles if no one is allowed to ask the question?
November 14th, 2011 at 12:51 pm
121, If you really want to get into a philosophical discussion about the subjective and objective, I believe in objective truth, but objective knowledge is more tenuous. All knowledge is received and processed by the senses of the human subject. That’s the epistemological trap, if you will. The only way for objective knowledge to be received is through the experience of the subject – a subjective experience. So I believe in objective truth and absolute truth, but it can only be experienced in a relational subjective process.
However, on a more practical level I do differentiate between facts and opinions – it seems to be you who has difficulty on this process. For example, Mitt Romney got an Ivy League education would be a fact. Mitt Romney flops and Newt fights would be an opinion. Newt Flops and Mitt fights would also be an opinion. One is true, another is false, but two people can hold these opinions without being dishonest – one of them’s just wrong. I don’t know specifically what you’re calling a lie this time around. It has been my experience that you call opinions lies. However, all I see consistently is you calling people liars, day in and day out. You could maintain a bit of respect if you limited yourself to calling people liars in comments where you actually point out the lie. However, when you litter thread after thread with comments that blast people as liars without stating the lie, you leave the impression that you just can’t handle political disagreement.
November 14th, 2011 at 12:54 pm
So much for Romney not being able to break 25% in the national polling
November 14th, 2011 at 12:57 pm
I like how the people forced to pay attention to the race because they knew they would be surveyed again voted for Romney in droves.
November 14th, 2011 at 1:00 pm
128 – None of the “flip and fought” crap is anything that I have referred to as a lie. Thanks for making those false assumptions though. Your experience is based on false assumptions.
Here is Smack’s lie of today:
“Mitt doesn’t truly believe he has fliiped and flopped on anything.”
That isn’t an opinion, that is a lie.
Smack has misstated facts that he knows are untrue on several occasions. Then he leaves and comes back a few weeks later and does it again. What do you call that other than lying?
November 14th, 2011 at 1:16 pm
131, Unless you’re having direct visions into what Mitt believes, anything referencing them is an opinion. Some opinions are more founded then others, some opinions are ridiculous, but that doesn’t mean they are lies. Get back to me when you have an actual verifiable lie. You know, something dealing with facts that can be proven true or false – not something that has to do with Romney’s inner mental processes.
“Thanks for making those false assumptions though. Your experience is based on false assumptions.”
Sorry but you kind of ask for it when you constantly attack people for being liars in comments that don’t state the lie. I may get it wrong sometimes, but if the above is an example of what you’ve got then I’d say I’ve got a pretty good idea of your game.
November 14th, 2011 at 1:21 pm
132 – Unless you assume Mitt himself is a liar, Smack’s “opinion” is a lie. He has admitted to changing positions several times. How is that an opinion?
November 14th, 2011 at 1:22 pm
132 – In my opinion, you are a liar too. What do you think about that?
November 14th, 2011 at 1:25 pm
132 – If what Smack is saying isn’t a lie, what is it? Mitt has admitted several times to changing positions. Is Smack saying that Mitt is a liar? If so, how is that any more acceptable than me calling Smack a liar?
November 14th, 2011 at 1:38 pm
First of all he said that in the context of health-care, where Mitt indeed has not admitted any flop, even though it would be possible to have the opinion that Mitt’s change in emphasis on this issue amount to such. Or perhaps, Smack was being hyperbolic, or maybe Smack typed without thinking, I don’t really know nor do I care. Point is, there are options besides, Smack lies. And Smack has given some good evidence that he’s not a bot who’s intellectually dishonest. He admits when his own candidate is doing bad and bad things about his candidate, which is something I never see coming from you. However, you seem downright obsessed with proving your “Smack lies” thesis. For the sake of argument, let’s say you’re right and Smack is a dirty stinkin no good liar. Still all you’re doing is making yourself look like a jackass by harping on something no-one else believes or cares about.
November 14th, 2011 at 1:43 pm
“132 – In my opinion, you are a liar too. What do you think about that?”
I’d think I just got called a liar by an anonymous blogger with an unhealthy obsession for calling people liars. I’m done here. For your own good, I suggest you step away from the computer and reflect on what you’re doing.
November 14th, 2011 at 2:41 pm
132. You’ve got some good points, but an opinion stated as fact is, imo, a lie.
If he’d said, “I don’t think Mitt believes…” That would be opinion.
But, when he says, “Mitt doesn’t believe”, that’s a statement as fact, and unless Smack knows it’s true, it’s a lie.
November 14th, 2011 at 2:42 pm
138. Correction…
“an opinion stated as a fact WHEN IT’S FALSE is a lie.”
November 14th, 2011 at 4:20 pm
137 – Would it make you feel better if I used a euphemism like “dishonest” or “misleading”?
November 14th, 2011 at 5:11 pm
Is Cain Moral? He’s been attacked for sexual harrassment. Gingrich has had affairs- can Iowa support that? Romney might be Mormon, but he’s a moralistic. So big deal. He has been w/ his wife for like 42 years. Each of his sons were married, and then had children… Seems to me that Mitt should be Heaven in their eyes.
November 14th, 2011 at 9:10 pm
Thrilled that the two real viable, intelligent candidates are finally emerging. Been waiting for the clowns to leave the center ring for weeks now. As a Romney guy, this is fabulous. The reason…the establishment will never, ever, ever back Newt. They can’t. They (prior congress) fined him, and kicked him off the Speaker’s perch. How many house members have formally endorsed Newt? two? three? one?
The money will only flow to him to a point. Mitt will have the corporate money and the DC entitlement money. If this comes down to a two person race, Mitt easily coasts home with it.