Over at the Hedgehog Report (a great site dedicated to posting nothing but political polls), David Wissing has compiled his first look at what a general election matchup would look like between Romney and Obama, and then between Gingrich and Obama.
Using the most recent poll from each state, the electoral college math currently looks like this:
- Romney – 256
- Obama – 256
- Tie – 26
- Obama – 451
- Gingrich – 76
- Tie – 11
Of course, the usual caveats apply: most of these polls are from PPP, since they are the only outfit polling a lot of these states, and so the results should be taken with a grain of salt. Also, some of the polls are older (Obama v Gingrich in Colorado hasn’t been polled since February, for instance).
However, this gives us a glimpse into what a general election might look like with our two current frontrunners.
November 29th, 2011 at 10:45 am
No one can make a rational case that Newt Gingrich has a prayer against Obama, and polls like this just reinforce this. Newt’s incredibly messy personal life (far worse than Herman Cain) and shady dealings (he was thrown out by his own party) will destroy his electoral chances.
At this point, the dingbat Anybody-But-Romney Wing just have this twisted view that the only battle that matters is getting rid of Romney, that somehow then everything will magically fall into place. The real battle is getting rid of Obama.
November 29th, 2011 at 10:48 am
Are we going to get the PPP Arizona Poll that shows Mitt comfortably winning the state, but also shows Gingrich tied? In Arizona!!
It illustrates the lesson from polling that Mitt beats Obama and Gingrich gets cremated by him…..nationwide. Republicans are like Lemmings who keep running until they all sail over the cliff…..then the few survivors start mating like rabbits, they regain their numbers, then do it all over again.
Let’s see…..watched this happen with Bush senior’s renomination in 1992, with Dole’s nomination in 1996, with McCain’s nomination in 2008. Hope I don’t see it happen in 2012 with Gingrich!!
November 29th, 2011 at 10:51 am
I could at least understand the drive for people to elect someone like Bachmann or Santorum. By nominating one of those two, you are at least making an ideological stand, even while losing to Obama. But nominating Newt Gingrich accomplishes NOTHING at all. You not only give away the election to Obama in 2012, but you sacrifice everything the values the Tea Party has worked so hard for over the past four years.
With Romney, you may be sacrificing some ideological differences, but at least you get rid of Obama.
November 29th, 2011 at 10:56 am
I would pay to watch Newt debate Obama on Pay-per-View.
Yeah.
These numbers will change fast.
But I am happy for a little good news for the Rombots…they were about to lose it big time this morning. Not pretty.
November 29th, 2011 at 10:57 am
The not Romney’s are beginning to remind me of the geniuses who brought us Sharon Angle and Christine O’Donnell. Yes, lets once again nominate a candidate who has zero shot at actually winning the election just because.
November 29th, 2011 at 10:58 am
Did Utah turn blue? Assuming gingrich is the nominee, the party will have given a giant middle finger to Mitt and the 90% of Utah Republicans that support him, I wonder how much energy there will be in Utah to turn out given the nastiness this cycle from the ABR crowd. If there truly are a large number of ABR’s out there, whose whole life is dedicated to stopping Mitt Romney, then don’t be surprised when a great deal of us convert to ABR as well – Anybody but Republican.
November 29th, 2011 at 10:58 am
Woah. Only an imbecile would pick Gingrich over Romney and I mean that in all sincerity.
November 29th, 2011 at 10:59 am
A race between Newt and Obama would be over months before the debates even happen.
Tele,
Why is it that you continue to talk politics when you are obviously clueless about the subject? The Romney campaign is almost giddy that they have Gingrich as a foil in place of a Huckabee, Palin, or Perry. The fact that this political reality escapes you underscores the fact that you’re too stupid to stray too far from the confines of C4P.
November 29th, 2011 at 11:01 am
5. Funny, the Rombots remind me of the geniuses who poured millions into the losing campaigns of Carly Fiorina and Meg Whitman…money that would have actually done some good in the races you mentioned, but who got close to zero support from the party.
Yeah. Like that!
November 29th, 2011 at 11:03 am
“These numbers will change fast.”
This is the suspension of disbelief that fans of Vice President Palin, Senator Angle, Senator O’Donnell, and Governor Paladino were banking on.
Gingrich is one of the most well known, and despised politicians of the last 50 years. Again, a little studying would go along way for you, pal.
November 29th, 2011 at 11:04 am
Max, just how insecure are you?
Do you really think your lashing out like this is anything more than a defense mechanism? You shouldn’t tie your feelings of self worth toe the fortunes of a political candidate like CR does, that is just not healthy.
Seek counseling man.
Serious.
November 29th, 2011 at 11:04 am
A lot of the polls with Gingrich are OLD. If we had recent polling in each of these states, then it might be an apples to apples comparison. Until then, this is fun…but speculation.
November 29th, 2011 at 11:06 am
10 Exactly right.
So far in debates Newt has called for Frank and Dodd to go to jail for their association with Freddie Mac (cough, cough) and called for removing rules of engagement for soldiers, and that’s just the tip of the iceberg. Newt has said some crazy stuff in these debates but because we are playing to the right wing, he doesn’t get called on it. In a general election, those words would be brought back up.
November 29th, 2011 at 11:06 am
9.
What are you smoking? Angle and O’Donnell were two of the worst candidates ever. They stunk on ice. The party didn’t pour money into them because anyone with any political sense knew how horrible they were.
I’m betting you’re one of those people that believed the country was just dying for the bold leadership of Sarah Palin and had she gotten in she would have won not just the nomination but the election in a walk, aren’t you?
November 29th, 2011 at 11:07 am
So, this has been an interesting week so far…no?
Curious, which is worse for Romney, Newt getting the Union Leader endorsement or Cain dropping out?
November 29th, 2011 at 11:10 am
#9 — if you give me an either/or choice between an Angle/O’Donnell or a Whitman/Fiorina, I’m taking the latter every day of the week and twice on Sunday. That’s a no-brainer. And the fact that it isn’t to a portion of the GOP is frightening to me for the sake of our party’s future.
November 29th, 2011 at 11:11 am
#6. I’ve wondered about that myself. Wouldn’t that be ironic… The ABR crowd crows about how they stopped Romney only to see Newt lose the general because Obama wins Utah.
Ultimately, it wouldn’t happen for two reasons: 1. The general would be over before Utah polls even closed and 2. While the inclination may be there in that scenario, Utahns would stick with what’s best for the country when push came to shove and vote against Obama. I could see a third party candidate win there in a Gingrich/ Obama/ Bloomberg race however.
November 29th, 2011 at 11:12 am
For those claiming dems would rather run against Newt I must refer you to the “devastating” anti-Mitt ad. If they are running that now I can only imagine what they are planning to run later.
November 29th, 2011 at 11:12 am
These numbers actually understate the case. They merely reflect current polling. They DON’T reflect the OPPO research Obama has on Gingrich….which would DESTROY him…..he might have to leave the country after being hit with a Billion Dollars of attack ads. He would become a national embarrassment…..a new Pariah…..and he would cost us a takeover of the Senate.
Fortunately, Newt doesn’t possess the wherewithal to contest the Primary in a serious way. After defeats in New Hampshire and Florida, Mitt will win the 7 states in February, and it will be all over.
November 29th, 2011 at 11:14 am
I would guess if newt wins the gop nomination, there would be a major 3rd party person run…bloomberg, trump, etc.
November 29th, 2011 at 11:15 am
Tele,
It’s the exact opposite. I don’t allow feelings or emotions to influence my judgement on something as important as the presidency. That’s why I can easily call Palin a moron, and Gingrich a hasbeen. I don’t allow emotions to cloud the glaring reality of who these people actually are.
And it’s this grounding in reality that allows me to advise you to spend more time focusing on your career as a bus driver and less on something beyond your grasp, like politics.
November 29th, 2011 at 11:22 am
Gary Johnson 3rd party run would doom Republican candidate:
http://www.conservativehq.com/article/5644-republican-establishment-pushes-gary-johnson-third-party-run-and-their-demise
November 29th, 2011 at 11:26 am
“I’ll turn this damn bus around!”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6dncx6O5J4U
November 29th, 2011 at 11:28 am
gary johnson not so much as ron paul would hurt the gop nominee…maybe huntsman could run 3rd party if newt is the nominee. The problem with that is is ko’s any chance he has in 2016 or to land the sec of state job someday but it might be his best bet to win the white house.
November 29th, 2011 at 11:29 am
No surprises here. Gingrich will be (yes, will be: I’m beginning to think he’s the favorite) a disaster. And thus the right punts their best opportunity to save the country, for a serial adulterer and unprincipled, bloviating, dilettante intellectual.
November 29th, 2011 at 11:30 am
Gingrich can’t win the general election, but there is no arguing that he is now the front runner for the GOP nomination.
November 29th, 2011 at 11:30 am
Holy cow! Gingrich is a disaster.
November 29th, 2011 at 11:32 am
I just feel like vomiting all over the GOP. Or at least 75% of them.
November 29th, 2011 at 11:33 am
Gingrich will not be vetted by the press, and the democrats will not be attacking him for obvious reasons. Most Americans do not even know about his extra-marital affairs, no less his ethics violations, bad-checks scandal, etc.
November 29th, 2011 at 11:34 am
Gingrich is the GOP Obama – a great speaker who has really done nothing that would translate to the White House.
November 29th, 2011 at 11:35 am
If we nominate the dead-beat dad, serial adulterer, then we deserve the 4 more years of Obama.
November 29th, 2011 at 11:35 am
Buck could have won, Angle might have been able to, O’Donnell…well, she never could win. Buck was outspent over 3:1 in Colorado and came within 2% of taking that seat. Had some of the money poured into Fiorina been put into Buck, who knows how that race could have ended up. Also, had the GOP in Colorado / Tom Tancredo not royally screwed up the Gubernatorial race, there would have been a candidate for Buck to campaign with / share the costs of campaigning. But, that’s another story.
November 29th, 2011 at 11:36 am
30. Yeah…actually balancing the Federal budget, reforming welfare, banning partial birth abortions…I can see why moderates consider that ‘nothing.’
Perfectly understandable.
November 29th, 2011 at 11:38 am
Anybody but Republican, if Gingrich takes it. Even Obama.
November 29th, 2011 at 11:39 am
I will not vote for an amoral man like Gingrich.
November 29th, 2011 at 11:46 am
Petunia, he has joined the church, repented and asked forgiveness.
Works for me.
November 29th, 2011 at 11:47 am
#25 MEM, this had to turn into a two-man race at some point. This doesn’t mean Newt’s gonna win the whole thing in the end.
November 29th, 2011 at 11:48 am
Gingrich got caught with his pants down and admitted to what he had been caught at. That doesn’t amount to sincere repentance.
November 29th, 2011 at 11:50 am
So much for the idea that just anyone can beat Obama…
November 29th, 2011 at 11:50 am
“Gingrich is the GOP Obama – a great speaker who has really done nothing that would translate to the White House.”
Reginald I very much agree with pretty much everything you say here at Race, so don’t take this wrong. Obama is a better man than Newt. To say they are equivalent is to slur Obama without justification.
November 29th, 2011 at 11:50 am
Just as there are two Mitts there are two rombot minds. One is defeatest and cowardly, surrenders at a cough. The other is Panglossian optimistic. Nothing is wrong, smooth sailing, that iceberg will melt before we hit it.
November 29th, 2011 at 11:51 am
Newt has more baggage then an airport terminal.
Perry will chew him up and spit him out.
Perry is the only true conservative!
November 29th, 2011 at 11:56 am
42. “Perry will chew him up and spit him out.”
Comedy Gold! Hard to believe, but Perry has been corrupted by corporate interests even more so than Newt.
November 29th, 2011 at 12:08 pm
Did you just drop by after sending the day playing Second Life?
Just wondering because most of what you post is pure fantasy.
Most Rombots feel Mitt can win the nomination and beat Obama, but it’s going to be a tough fight both times, the margin for error is slim, and Romney is fighting headwinds from the ABR crowd,the Dems, and the media lefties.
Anything could happen that could cause Mitt to lose the nomination and maybe even the general.
But I see absolutely no way that Newt comes even close to winning the general or successfully leading the country should Obama accidentally show up DOA…
November 29th, 2011 at 12:08 pm
Metro,
I don’t think that’s true. Most GOP primaries have been relatively bloodless affairs. We have only had one “2-man race” in modern history (’76). There’s no particular reason why Republican primary voters couldn’t have said “ok, all these other guys are awful. We don’t like Mitt but he’s not quite awful and so now we’ll rally around him”, giving him the traditional 35-40% of a true front-runner. I’d argue that, given the quality of the field, this is manifestly what ought to have happened- that no other course is comprehensible. Why are Republican voters so keen to fall for obviously, absurdly, desperately, flawed candidates, who are neither preferable to Romney ideologically nor at all likely to oust the supposedly hated Obama. It can’t be simply disappointed hopes giving way to irrational optimism (“maybe candidate X is conservative and will beat Obama after all!”). It’s fine to blame Paul Ryan and Chris Christie for not getting in or Tim Pawlenty for being so marvelously inept but those are only partial explanations. The complete explanation, whatever it is, does not reflect well on the Republican electorate. Either it’s actually anti-Mormonism (an explanation I’ve fiercely resisted) or derangement.
November 29th, 2011 at 12:12 pm
#45: I meant, given Mitt Romney, it had to become a two-man race.
I don’t think there is a single answer to the anti-Romney sentiment. For some, it’s Mormonism. For others, it’s the flip-flopping. Others, his personality. Others, cultural cues.
November 29th, 2011 at 12:20 pm
Gingrich will keep going stronger in the short term
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2011/11/gingrich-still-rising.html
November 29th, 2011 at 12:27 pm
PPP :
Herman Cain’s support fades to zero in the next few weeks, whether because he drops out or because people abandon him because of all his issues, Newt Gingrich is going to keep on climbing. He’s going to get stronger before he gets weaker. Gingrich’s fall may come and if history is any guide in this race it will probably come before Iowa. But in the short term Cain’s issues should mean Gingrich just keeps on gaining.
November 29th, 2011 at 12:29 pm
#44 – Jerald, I don’t even know what Second Life is. I assume a video game. I have never played any of those shoot’em up games. But I do read (and try to write) fiction. I would classify this primary as part drama, part horror story.
November 29th, 2011 at 12:30 pm
Mitt Romney’s Fli– err, Evolution, on Abortion:
http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2011/11/29/142827112/mitt-romneys-evolution-on-abortion
Rombots can rejoice: the left-wing media is proving Mitt’s pro-life cred. Excerpts:
“Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney has been labeled a flip-flopper. And when it comes to abortion, the former governor of Massachusetts appears to have changed his position from being in favor of abortion rights to being opposed.
But now some people are asking if Romney ever supported abortion rights at all? Backers of abortion rights don’t think so.”
…
“[Romney's] 2005 veto of a bill to provide the so-called morning-after pill to rape victims made him even more anti-abortion than other governors who also ended up in this year’s GOP presidential field.
“Pawlenty and Huntsman actually signed those bills,” she said, referring to the former Minnesota and Utah governors Tim Pawlenty and Jon Huntsman. “So you can see that he is to the right (of them) and very anti-choice.”"
November 29th, 2011 at 12:54 pm
Al Gore and John Kerry won debates against Bush and still lost, and either of them were much more likable and had less baggage than Gingrich.
November 29th, 2011 at 12:56 pm
36:
So if Bernie Madoff repented, give him amnesty and make him Secretary of Treasury or a chair of federal reserve? President really isn’t a starter level job, if you have a history of being a horrible human being, president shouldn’t be the first job you can take after repenting.
November 29th, 2011 at 1:08 pm
On what planet are people like Gore or Kerry or Willard likeable in any sense of the term?
Romney’s Fading Popularity
November 29th, 2011 at 1:13 pm
18 – Are you being serious? Do you know how much material is out there for ads against Newt?
November 29th, 2011 at 1:16 pm
You mean like this bunker-busting anti-Willard missile released by the DNC?—oh, wait, this is Willard himself http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PoU41UwL5LI&feature=related
November 29th, 2011 at 1:21 pm
53:
Gore or Kerry might be woody, but at least they don’t seem to be horrible human beings, or don’t have history of being a horrible human being.
November 29th, 2011 at 1:25 pm
45 – Why do you fiercely resist what has been shown over and over again?
November 29th, 2011 at 1:26 pm
50 – Don’t tell MWS. Romney is clearly a charlatan on life issues, compared to the Saintly Huntsman.
November 29th, 2011 at 1:52 pm
Somehow this is bad for romney and good for newt. I am sure of it.
November 29th, 2011 at 2:08 pm
I think what you’re going to see over the coming weeks is some high profile endorsements of Romney, like Marco Rubio and Paul Ryan in addition to a slew of Governors and Senators. Any elected Republican leader that has a shred of common sense and wants to see what is best for this country is not going to allow Gingrich to have the nomination and hand Obama a second term. There’s also no compelling ideological reason for Gingrich over Romney, his transgressions are in my opinion far greater, he just adds a REALLY messy personal life and all sorts of shady dealings to the mix.
It’s clear that this is now a 2 man race: Gingrich and Romney, and the dynamic is likely to stick. It’s “speak now or forever hold your peace”. I understand Romney’s not perfect, but can you imagine the high-fives Obama’s reelection team will be giving themselves if the GOP is stupid enough to nominate Newt?
November 29th, 2011 at 2:19 pm
casuist and pablo is that really the best you can do??? Your starting to make CR look smart in comparison.
November 29th, 2011 at 2:20 pm
60 – I think you might be correct … and every one of them will be labled a RINO by the RomNots. Not that that matters.
November 29th, 2011 at 3:08 pm
This is a great post because I don’t think anyone has been asking this question about Newt.
Has Newt ever run anywhere other than Georgia? Has he ever run a national campaign? Is there any evidence that he can attract independents or moderate democrats? Has he ever run in a blue state as a Republican?
This election is too important to roll the dice on a guy who may or may not appeal to a large swath of people.
Last time Newt was on the national stage he was extremely unpopular by a lot of different people.
Newt seems like a very high risk candidate to run against an incumbent.
No wonder Obama is going after Romney so hard now. I’m sure they are hoping upon hope the GOP elects Newt.
November 29th, 2011 at 3:33 pm
Yes, isn’t it strange about Willard’s fantasy endorsements:Emperor Romney has No Clothes?
November 29th, 2011 at 3:53 pm
Karl Rove just made a point on Fox that if Gingrich makes the case that he is the true consistent conservative, he might find that a very risky strategy. His shifting of positions are extremely problematic because they to a great degree affect our national security and economy. He has a history of being soft on immigration, referring to the Paul Ryan plan as right wing social engineering, his remarks on cap and trade, and his stance on a national one size fits all individual mandate. Oh but Newt is the consistent conservative. Romney has already backed Newt into a corner a couple times in the debates…on immigration and on the individual mandate. Romney only supports a mandate on the state level and NOT for every state. With Newt’s indecisiveness, how can we expect him to beat Obama.
November 29th, 2011 at 3:56 pm
I stopped reading right here. Is there a GOP figure more discredited than Rove on any issue? He’s a Bush family consigliare in the form of a ventriloquist dummy for the establishment GOP.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:03 pm
I stopped reading right there. Is there a Race42012 commenter more discredited than casuist on any issue? LOL!
November 29th, 2011 at 4:14 pm
LOL!
Yeah, that’s funny, but do you know what’s really funny? Willard had plastic surgery on his forehead. http://dailycaller.com/2011/11/21/political-plastic-surgeries-slideshow/romney-3/ Soon his eyebrows will be up around his hairline.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:27 pm
tele –
I’d have to ask you – do you believe Romney in his switch over abortion?
also – why are Newt’s “timely” changes (he was sittin’ next to Nancy not all that long ago) seen as politically savvy and Mitt’s are seen as pandering – to you?
November 29th, 2011 at 5:03 pm
News flash! Bloggers Create Their Own Conundrums.
For once I’d like to read responses from people who are capable of assessing issues with common sense or even conventional wisdom. Oh how this country needs those who can exercise independent thought and judgement. It’s scary knowing that in 2012 bloggers will be a percentage of those voting.
November 30th, 2011 at 3:05 am
[...] [...]
November 30th, 2011 at 1:48 pm
Democrats would love to see Gingrich get the nomination given how polarizing he is. For this reason the poll numbers make little sense. What does make sense is Democrats skewing the numbers to give Gingrich an edge in getting the nomination. If Gingrich does get the nomination, his poll numbers versus Obama will “magically” go back to where you’d expect them, with Obama at about +10 or 15 over Gingrich. Romney would defeat Obama and is the person Democrats don’t want to see nominated.