Des Moines Register/Selzer & Co. Iowa 2012 GOP Caucus Poll

December 27-30, 2011

• Mitt Romney 24% (16%) {18%} [22%] (23%)
• Ron Paul 22% (18%) {19%} [12%] (7%)
• Rick Santorum 15% (6%) {3%} [5%] (4%)
• Newt Gingrich 12% (25%) {17%} [7%] (7%)
• Rick Perry 11% (6%) {7%} [7%]
• Michele Bachmann 7% (8%) {5%} [8%] (22%)

December 29-30, 2011

• Mitt Romney 24%
• Rick Santorum 21%
• Ron Paul 18%

Survey of 602 likely Republican caucus-goers was conducted December 27-30, 2011. The margin of error is +/- 4 percentage points.  In the final two days of polling, 302 likely caucus-goers were interviewed, with a margin of error of +/- 5.6 percentage points.  Results from the poll conducted November 27-30, 2011 are in parentheses.  Results from the poll conducted November 10-12, 2011 are in curly brackets.  Results from the poll conducted October 23-26, 2011 are in square brackets.  Results from the poll conducted June 19-22, 2011 are in parentheses.

Inside the numbers:

Forty-one percent (41%) of likely caucus goers say they could still be persuaded to change their minds

–Data compilation and analysis courtesy of The Argo Journal

Iowa Evangelical leader and former WHO Radio host, Steve Deace, has endorsed Newt Gingrich. The timing is somewhat surprising, as it was assumed that Deace would not endorse this late:

Why I Am Endorsing Newt Gingrich for President

By Steve Deace

This country is in trouble and bold leadership is needed. As someone that has had the privilege to vet these candidates as closely as just about anybody else has, I’ve come to the conclusion there are several good, Christian people running that most years I would vote for.
However, this isn’t most years.

Sadly, there are only two candidates offering a real means by which to actually undo that which the Left has done to this country for the past 50 years, and not just conservative platitudes. One of those candidates is Ron Paul, but his foreign policy is naive at best and reckless at worst. The other is Newt Gingrich, who has campaigned on what I believe is the most important issue facing us as a people—the loss of the rule of law.

The Left has used unelected judges and judicial oligarchy to reinvent the American way of life, from secularism to the loss of the sanctity of life, to the redefining of marriage, the confiscation of private property, and the granting of imaginary rights. There is an entire chapter of my new book devoted to the need for conservatives and Christians to confront judicial oligarchy once and for all. I have spent the past two years of my radio program educating my audience on this issue, and was a vocal proponent of Iowa’s historic judicial retention election last year, and Newt’s assistance with that effort was vital.

After offering every candidate in the race the chance to show they understand the gravity of this issue, Gingrich is the only one who has demonstrated he does, and can also use the bully pulpit of the presidency to educate Americans on the need to return to the rule of law.

I understand Newt has taken positions and done things in his personal life I do not agree with, but to his credit he has come on my radio program and been very transparent about those things, and has shown humility and a willingness to be transparent in the process.

He has signed the Personhood Pledge I advocated for. He has offered one of the most articulate defenses of marriage and the family I have ever read from a candidate. He has agreed to never sign a budget into law that includes a plug nickel for an abortion provider. He has agreed to seek personhood legislation and a stronger defense of marriage act that would limit the judicial oligarchs’ ability to legislate from the bench.

With these steps he has shown the leadership this country desperately needs. Electing another Obamney from the ruling class changes nothing. Electing another nice conservative with no proven ability to govern or a killer instinct to take on the system changes nothing, even if it makes us all feel warm and fuzzy inside.
This is a time for leadership, not warm fuzzies. The future is at stake, and we may never get another environment with the country so prepared to challenge the system as we have right now.

I suppose I could stay silent and let the process run its course, as many other so-called leaders are doing, so as to not worry about alienating some of my fellow believers by making this decision. But then I’d have to look my children in the eye years from now and explain to them why I stood by and said nothing when I had the chance, as more hackneyed Obamneys finish off what’s left of the greatest country God has ever shed His grace upon.

I’m willing to take full responsibility for this decision, just as I hope those that have chosen to support other candidates who themselves have fatal flaws are willing to do the same. It is my hope the other Republican candidates will follow Gingrich’s bold leadership in providing the country a true alternative to President Obama.

It is my prayer that next year that for once we actually have something to vote for, and not just something to vote against. I am making this endorsement in the hopes that will be the case. Sometimes the most broken people are the ones God does the most tremendous work through. I know that has been true in my life.

Whether you are for or against Romney, I suspect most of you will find the first twenty seconds of this little clip amusing. It comes from one of Mitt’s recent Iowan rallies (yesterday, I believe). Chris Christie is introducing Mitt…

Nancy French writing in Patheos (emphasis added):

With all the hoopla surrounding the Virginia ballot, I wondered how the candidates fared in my home state.  Tennessee works a little differently than other states.  In fact, it seems that every state has a little tweak, a little nuance that makes it a little different from the others.  That’s why the process is a great peek into how a candidate can handle complicated issues that require organization and hard work.

Tennessee will have fifty-eight delegates to the Tampa Republican National Convention. Each of our nine congressional districts will have three delegates.  That means that Presidential candidates must find delegates who are leaders in their community willing to walk around with a clipboard asking friends and strangers to sign their names and their addresses on behalf of their candidacy for their preferred Presidential candidate. Each delegate had to get one hundred valid signatures of registered voters.

…

In addition to the congressional delegates, fourteen “at large” delegates will be elected. These delegates had a slightly easier job, because they weren’t restricted to a certain district and could signatures from any registered voter in our state.

A full slate of delegate candidates would be forty-one.

So which candidates were able to supply a full slate for Tennessee?  Only one:

Michelle Bachmann: 0

Gary Johnson: 0

Rick Santorum: 0

Ron Paul: 35

Newt Gingrich: 34

Rick Perry: 27

Mitt Romney: 48

…

[I]t’s worth noting that the Yankee governor received forty-eight delegates in our southern state, pulling off what no other candidate could.  What does this say about the conventional wisdom that southerners won’t warm to him?

You will note that Mrs. French states that a full slate of delegates is 41. Yet where none of the other candidates qualified that many, Mitt qualified 48. (I checked. He really does have 48 delegates qualified. You can check here yourself if you wish.) So not only did Romney fulfill all the requirements for Tennessee, he went the extra mile besides.

That is a hallmark of his organization. In Virginia when told the party would automatically qualify him if he reached 15,000 signatures, he wasn’t satisfied until his campaign had collected more than 16,000. Even then he still had his people do an audit on over a third of them to verify they had enough valid signatures to get on the ballot. The last step was totally unnecessary, but he did it anyway.

I am grateful I don’t have to compete with the guy.

4 days until Iowa…

Intrade

Romney to win GOP nomination: 76.9
Paul to win GOP nomination: 5.7
Gingrich to win GOP Nomination: 5.7
Obama to win reelection: 52.4
Iowa Caucuses Winner: Romney 50.0 - Paul 37.9 – Rick Santorum 10.8
New Hampshire Primary Winner: Romney 89.5 – Paul 8.9 – Huntsman 2.0
South Carolina Primary Winner: Romney 50.0 – Gingrich 21.0 – Santorum 19.7

Polling:

Obama Approval (RCP): 46.4% / 48.2% (-1.8%)
GOP Nomination (RCP): Gingrich +2.2
Gallup Daily Tracking GOP Nomination: Romney 26%, Gingrich 24%

And as always, have at it in the comments. Anything goes…

One of our regular commenters, Matt “MWS” wrote on another thread (emphasis added):

… There are three brackets in this tourney. The Not Mitt bracket is Santorum, Perry, Bachmann, and Newt. The Not Not Mitt bracket is Mitt and J-Hunt. Paul is his own bracket, and not really in the Tourney.

So naturally, all the Not Mitt candidates have to eliminate each other to advance to the finals. J-Hunt, however, is the only one who has to eliminate Mitt to advance to the finals. But nobody’s really paying attention to him.

I suspect Iowa will pretty well settle the Not Mitt bracket. Then you will see more direct attacks on Mitt. If the Not Mitt bracket is still muddled after Iowa, that’s definitely good for Romney. In that case, South Carolina will settle the Not Mitt bracket.

The Not Not Mitt bracket will be settled in New Hampshire. Jon is almost out of time. He pretty well needs a hail mary, a two point conversion, an on-side kick, and a field goal to win that- all in the last two minutes.

Barring a last second Mitt Meltdown, Romney appears to have New Hampshire well and comfortably in the bag thus eliminating Huntsman. However, looking at the last minute Iowa polls we’ve been seeing, it is possible that Santorum, Perry, and Newt could end up being in a virtual three-way tie next Tuesday. Michele Bachmann would be out, but what then?

Santorum is handicapped by having little money and even less organization outside of Iowa. If he wants to continue past Iowa, nothing short of a first place finish in the Not Mitt race there will do. His latest surge suggests he might just do it. Unfortunately, he is going to have to do far better than just finishing ahead of Perry and Gingrich if he wants the Not Mitt bracket all to himself. He is going to have to crush the other two. Perry has money and organization with which to continue. Newt might not have large amounts of money and much of an organization, but he currently has a nice double digit lead in South Carolina. He’s not going to give that up without a fight. Nothing short of a solid repudiation by the Iowan voters would induce Perry and Newt to concede the field to Santorum after Iowa, and the latest polling doesn’t support that scenario at all.

So expect at least two, probably even three Not Mitts to continue on to South Carolina. The state should then determine the final outcome of the Not Mitt bracket, but by then it might be too late. With the split in the Not Mitt vote, it’s very possible that Romney might sweep the first three contests entirely. If he manages to do that, trying to deny him the nomination would become a near Herculean task.

Angus Reid Public Opinion 2012 Republican Presidential Primary Survey

At this point, which one of these Republican presidential candidates are you thinking of supporting in your state’s primary or caucus? (“Decided Supporters” and “Leaners”) -

• Mitt Romney 32%
• Newt Gingrich 26%
• Ron Paul 10%
• Rick Perry 7%
• Michele Bachmann 7%
• Rick Santorum 5%
• Jon Huntsman Jr. 2%
• Not sure 11%

Methodology: From December 27 to December 29, 2011, Angus Reid Public Opinion conducted an online survey among 1,009 American adults who are absolutely certain of taking part in the Republican presidential primary or caucus in their state and are Springboard America panelists. The margin of error—which measures sampling variability—is +/- 3.1%. The results have been statistically weighted to ensure a sample representative of Republican Party voters in the United States. Discrepancies in or between totals are due to rounding.

Inside the numbers:

Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich are the only contenders who garner favorable views from more than half of Republican voters (at 58% and 51% respectively), followed by Michele Bachmann (41%), Rick Perry (39%), and Rick Santorum (33%). The two lowest ranked contenders are Ron Paul (27%) and Jon Huntsman Jr. (17%). Paul holds the largest proportions of unfavorable mentions (44%, with Gingrich and Perry tied for second place at 31%).

Mitt Romney has survived the surges of four distinct rivals to end the year at the top, followed by Newt Gingrich. Ron Paul keeps a steady group of supporters, but he appears to throw off Republicans at large, as evidenced by the high proportion of respondents who view him unfavorably. At this point, Romney’s base appears solid, while Gingrich is having trouble connecting with female voters.

On the personality front, Republicans are looking for an honest and trustworthy leader who understands their problems. Family values and previous experience are taking a back seat to more “presidential” qualities.

A similar situation ensues on the policy questions, where it becomes clear that the purity test is no longer applicable. Being pro-life, supporting an individual’s right to own firearms and defining marriage as between a man and a woman are the lowest ranked policy factors for absolutely certain Republican primary voters and caucus goers. In this election, the economy, the size of government, taxes and health care are definitely more important issues for the GOP electorate.

Gallup 2012 GOP Nomination Daily Tracking Poll

• Mitt Romney 26% {27%} [25%] (24%) {23%} [22%] (21%) {23%} [23%] (24%) {24%} [24%] (24%) {23%} [22%] (23%) {23%} [23%] (23%) {25%} [23%] (22%)
• Newt Gingrich 24% {23%} [25%] (25%) {26%} [26%] (27%) {25%} [25%] (26%) {28%} [28%] (29%) {31%} [31%] (33%) {33%} [35%] (37%) {34%} [36%] (37%)
• Ron Paul 11% {11%} [11%] (11%) {12%} [13%] (12%) {12%} [12%] (11%) {10%} [10%] (10%) {9%} [8%] (8%) {9%} [9%] (9%) {10%} [9%] (8%)
• Rick Perry 7% {8%} [8%] (8%) {8%} [8%] (7%) {8%} [8%] (7%) {6%} [6%] (5%) {6%} [7%] (6%) {6%} [6%] (6%) {5%} [6%] (7%)
• Michele Bachmann 5% {5%} [5%] (6%) {6%} [6%] (6%) {7%} [6%] (7%) {7%} [8%] (7%) {6%} [6%] (6%) {5%} [6%] (6%) {7%} [6%] (6%)
• Rick Santorum 5% {4%} [4%] (3%) {3%} [3%] (4%) {4%} [4%] (4%) {4%} [4%] (4%) {4%} [4%] (3%) {2%} [3%] (2%) {2%} [3%] (3%)
• Jon Huntsman 2% {2%} [1%] (2%) {1%} [1%] (1%) {2%} [2%] (2%) {2%} [2%] (2%) {2%} [2%] (2%) {2%} [2%] (1%) {1%} [1%] (1%)

Survey of at least 1,000 registered Republicans and Republican-leaning independents was conducted December 23-29, 2011. The margin of error is ± 3 percentage points.  Results from the poll conductedDecember 22-28, 2011 are in curly brackets.  Results from the poll conducted December 21-27, 2011 are in square brackets.  Results from the poll conducted December 20-26, 2011 are in parentheses.  Results from the poll conducted December 19-23, 2011 are in curly brackets.  Results from the poll conducted December 18-22, 2011 are in square brackets.  Results from the poll conducted December 17-21, 2011 are in parentheses.  Results from the poll conducted December 15-20, 2011 are in curly brackets.  Results from the poll conducted December 14-19, 2011 are in square brackets.  Results from the poll conducted December 13-18, 2011 are in parentheses.  Results from the poll conducted December 12-17, 2011are in curly brackets.  Results from the poll conducted December 11-16, 2011 are in Results from the poll conducted December 10-14, 2011 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted December 9-13, 2011are in curly brackets. Results from the poll conducted December 8-12, 2011 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted December 7-11, 2011 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted December 6-10, 2011 are in curly brackets.  Results from the poll conductedDecember 5-9, 2011 are in square brackets.  Results from the poll conducted December 4-8, 2011 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted December 3-7, 2011 are in curly brackets. Results from the poll conducted December 2-6, 2011 are in square brackets.  Results from the poll conducted December 1-5, 2011 are in parentheses.

–Data compilation and analysis courtesy of The Argo Journal

TelOpinion Research (R) Florida 2012 GOP Primary Poll

• Mitt Romney 27%
• Newt Gingrich 26%
• Ron Paul 5%
• Michele Bachmann 4%
• Rick Perry 4%
• Jon Huntsman 1%
• Rick Santorum 1%
• Undecided 31%

Survey of 780 Republican voters was conducted December 15-19, 2011

Inside the numbers:

Among self-identified members of the tea-party movement, Gingrich leads by eight points, 28-16. The two men almost evenly divide other voters, 28-26 in favor of Romney.

Gingrich also leads by 14 percentage points among very conservative voters, while Romney holds a 15-point edge among those who call themselves “somewhat conservative.” The two are essentially tied among moderates, with Gingrich holding a 20-17 advantage.

Gingrich also leads Romney among those who attend church more than once a week, with those who go to church weekly about evenly split. Voters who attend less frequently favor Romney, often strongly.

–Data compilation and analysis courtesy of The Argo Journal

We Ask America (R) Iowa 2012 GOP Caucus Poll

• Mitt Romney 24% [18%] (13%) {15%} [15%] (13%)
• Rick Santorum 17% [9%] (5%) {3%} [4%]
• Ron Paul 14% [19%] (11%) {11%} [8%] (5%)
• Newt Gingrich 13% [16%] (29%) {18%} [5%] (14%)
• Michele Bachmann 12% [15%] (13%) {11%} [17%]
• Rick Perry 10% [11%] (5%) {4%} [29%]
• Jon Huntsman 4% [4%] (4%) {2%} [1%]
• Undecided 7% [8%] (13%) {14%}

Survey of 889 likely Iowa GOP caucus participants was conducted December 29, 2011.  Results from the poll conducted December 20, 2011 are in square brackets.  Results from the poll conducted November 28, 2011 are in parentheses.  Results from the poll conducted November 6, 2011 are in curly brackets.  Results from the poll conducted August 16, 2011 are in square brackets.  Results from the poll conducted March 10, 2011 are in parentheses.

–Data compilation and analysis courtesy of The Argo Journal

NBC News-Marist Iowa 2012 GOP Caucus Poll

• Mitt Romney 23% [18%] (26%)
• Ron Paul 21% [17%] (12%)
• Rick Santorum 15% [5%] (3%)
• Rick Perry 14% [9%] (11%)
• Newt Gingrich 13% [26%] (5%)
• Michele Bachmann 6% [5%] (11%)
• Jon Huntsman 2% [2%] (1%)
• Undecided 7% [9%] (10%)

Second Choice

• Mitt Romney 21% [17%]
• Rick Perry 20% [11%]
• Rick Santorum 15% [8%]
• Newt Gingrich 13% [19%]
• Michele Bachmann 11% [12%]
• Ron Paul 9% [10%]
• Jon Huntsman 3% [3%]
• Undecided 8% [9%]

 

(more…)

PPP (D) New Hampshire 2012 GOP Primary Poll

• Mitt Romney 36% {35%} [28%] (40%)
• Ron Paul 21% {19%} [9%] (18%)
• Newt Gingrich 13% {17%} [4%] (17%)
• Jon Huntsman 12% {13%} [7%]
• Michele Bachmann 7% {5%} [21%] (8%)
• Buddy Roemer 3%
• Rick Perry 3% {2%} [9%]
• Rick Santorum 3% {3%}
• Someone else/Undecided 2% {4%} [9%] (10%)

Would you say you are strongly committed to that candidate, or might you end up supporting someone else?

• Strongly committed to that candidate 71% {65%}
• Might end up supporting someone else 29% {35%}

(more…)

Alex Roarty asks an interesting question over on the National Journal site:

Why Is No One Attacking Romney?

Mitt Romney’s confidence is brimming. The former governor, now widely seen as the favorite to win Iowa, announced Wednesday he’ll stay in the Hawkeye State the night of the caucus, a clear indication he anticipates a good result. If he does capture Iowa, he’ll head into New Hampshire, long his political stronghold, with a chance to become the first non-incumbent GOP presidential candidate ever to win the first two primary contests – a back-to-back triumph that would all but secure the nomination.

So, naturally, his Republican rivals have spent the last week castigating him on the trail and eviscerating him on TV, all in a desperate attempt to slow down his momentum and keep their own campaigns viable. Right? No – they’ve nearly done the opposite.

…

As they [the others] form a circular firing squad, Romney stepped back. Rather than engage his GOP opponents, as he’s done most of his campaign, he’s focused almost entirely on his No. 1 target, President Obama.

…

It’s really not that hard to understand what is happening. Mitt Romney primarily occupies the “Competent Executive” niche. His supporters have been loyal to him for years. Unless another candidate can convince Mitt’s supporters that he is the more competent executive, they are not going to defect easily.

One that could conceivably compete with Mitt in that niche is Rick Perry. Or maybe I should have said was Rick Perry. While it is true that he’s had a fairly successful run of 12 years as Texas Governor, the history so far of this campaign hasn’t exactly shown off his superior executive skills. Quite the opposite, in fact. First he leaped into this campaign with much fanfare, but it quickly became obvious that he has done little to no preparation. Competent executives do not initiate major undertakings without first thoroughly preparing for it. Rick seemed genuinely surprised when he discovered the party wasn’t going to just hand the nomination to him because he asked for it. He was going to have to earn it.

And then there was that Virginia ballot fiasco… .

Is there any wonder why Perry seems to be de-emphasizing the “Competent Executive” angle as of late and instead has been shooting for the “God’s Candidate” crowd?

And if not Perry, who? Newt Gingrich perhaps? Newt’s last real executive job as Speaker of the House saw him getting kicked out on his ear. He has done little since then to prove that his executive skills have improved much.  It’s been quite the opposite, actually. He took that Greek vacation right in the middle of last summer’s fundraising and organizing season. His whole campaign staff then quit in disgust.

And then there was that Virginia ballot fiasco… .

Huntsman, maybe? Perhaps, but as I’ve stated many times before, Jon is a solution looking for a problem. He has yet to articulate any real compelling reason to vote for him other than the fact that he’s not Romney.

And he didn’t even try to get on that Virginia ballot… .

No, Mitt’s core niche is quite safe from poachers. This forces the other candidates to look elsewhere for supporters to win over.They must attack each other and pretty much leave Mitt out of it. Unfortunately for them, squabbling amongst themselves and calling each other names allows Mitt to rise above it all and act Presidential. It makes him appear as the only adult in the room. Concerned voters wanting to defeat Obama next fall see this and then gravitate towards Mitt’s banner.

So Mr. Roarty, THAT is why no one is attacking Romney. There are no other “Competent Executive” types to compete with him. Pawlenty dropped out, and Huckabee, Daniels, Christie, Jindal and Barbour declined to run. That leaves just Mitt Romney to claim that niche.

So, apparently this is a real thing. Newt now has a website entitled, “Pets with Newt” where you can send pictures of your pets supporting Newt Gingrich. Here’s the cover photo:



Thoughts?

Bachmann said on Facebook that she, like Margaret Thatcher, will stand up for the free market. Here’s the video:

Gallup 2012 GOP Nomination Daily Tracking Poll

• Mitt Romney 27% [25%] (24%) {23%} [22%] (21%) {23%} [23%] (24%) {24%} [24%] (24%) {23%} [22%] (23%) {23%} [23%] (23%) {25%} [23%] (22%)
• Newt Gingrich 23% [25%] (25%) {26%} [26%] (27%) {25%} [25%] (26%) {28%} [28%] (29%) {31%} [31%] (33%) {33%} [35%] (37%) {34%} [36%] (37%)
• Ron Paul 11% [11%] (11%) {12%} [13%] (12%) {12%} [12%] (11%) {10%} [10%] (10%) {9%} [8%] (8%) {9%} [9%] (9%) {10%} [9%] (8%)
• Rick Perry 8% [8%] (8%) {8%} [8%] (7%) {8%} [8%] (7%) {6%} [6%] (5%) {6%} [7%] (6%) {6%} [6%] (6%) {5%} [6%] (7%)
• Michele Bachmann 5% [5%] (6%) {6%} [6%] (6%) {7%} [6%] (7%) {7%} [8%] (7%) {6%} [6%] (6%) {5%} [6%] (6%) {7%} [6%] (6%)
• Rick Santorum 4% [4%] (3%) {3%} [3%] (4%) {4%} [4%] (4%) {4%} [4%] (4%) {4%} [4%] (3%) {2%} [3%] (2%) {2%} [3%] (3%)
• Jon Huntsman 2% [1%] (2%) {1%} [1%] (1%) {2%} [2%] (2%) {2%} [2%] (2%) {2%} [2%] (2%) {2%} [2%] (1%) {1%} [1%] (1%)

Survey of at least 1,000 registered Republicans and Republican-leaning independents was conducted December 22-28, 2011. The margin of error is ± 3 percentage points.  Results from the poll conductedDecember 21-27, 2011 are in square brackets.  Results from the poll conducted December 20-26, 2011 are in parentheses.  Results from the poll conducted December 19-23, 2011 are in curly brackets.  Results from the poll conducted December 18-22, 2011 are in square brackets.  Results from the poll conducted December 17-21, 2011 are in parentheses.  Results from the poll conducted December 15-20, 2011 are in curly brackets.  Results from the poll conducted December 14-19, 2011 are in square brackets.  Results from the poll conducted December 13-18, 2011 are in parentheses.  Results from the poll conducted December 12-17, 2011are in curly brackets.  Results from the poll conducted December 11-16, 2011 are in Results from the poll conducted December 10-14, 2011 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted December 9-13, 2011are in curly brackets. Results from the poll conducted December 8-12, 2011 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted December 7-11, 2011 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted December 6-10, 2011 are in curly brackets.  Results from the poll conductedDecember 5-9, 2011 are in square brackets.  Results from the poll conducted December 4-8, 2011 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted December 3-7, 2011 are in curly brackets. Results from the poll conducted December 2-6, 2011 are in square brackets.  Results from the poll conducted December 1-5, 2011 are in parentheses.

–Data compilation and analysis courtesy of The Argo Journal

ARG Iowa 2012 GOP Caucus Poll

• Mitt Romney 22% {20%} [17%] (20%) {21%} [18%] (17%)
• Newt Gingrich 17% {19%} [22%] (27%) {8%} [8%] (12%)
• Ron Paul 16% {21%} [17%] (16%) {12%} [14%] (3%)
• Rick Santorum 11% {4%} [7%] (6%) {2%} [5%] (2%)
• Rick Perry 9% {9%} [13%] (5%) {14%} [2%]
• Michele Bachmann 8% {8%} [7%] (6%) {15%} [21%] (9%)
• Jon Huntsman 6% {6%} [5%] (3%) {1%} [3%] (0%)
• Buddy Roemer 1% {1%} [0%] (0%) {1%} [0%] (0%)
• Other 1% {0%} [1%] (0%) {1%} [2%]
• Undecided 9% {12%} [12%] (11%) {15%} [10%] (8%)

Among Likely GOP Caucus-Goers Saying They Will Definitely Participate in the Caucus (81%)

• Mitt Romney 23% {20%}
• Newt Gingrich 19% {22%}
  
• Ron Paul 16% {17%}
• Rick Santorum 10% {5%}
• Rick Perry 8% {10%}
• Michele Bachmann 8% {8%}
• Jon Huntsman 5% {5%}
• Buddy Roemer 1% {1%}
• Other 1% {0%}
• Undecided 9% {12%}

 

(more…)

Rasmussen Iowa 2012 GOP Caucus Poll

• Mitt Romney 23% {25%} [23%] (19%) {21%} [17%] (21%)
• Ron Paul 22% {20%} [18%] (10%) {10%} [14%] (16%)
• Rick Santorum 16% {10%} [6%] (5%) {4%} [4%]
• Newt Gingrich 13% {17%} [20%] (32%) {9%} [2%] (5%)
• Rick Perry 13% {10%} [10%] (6%) {7%} [29%] (12%)
• Michele Bachmann 5% {6%} [9%] (6%) {8%} [18%] (22%)
• Jon Huntsman 3% {4%} [5%] (2%) {2%} [3%] (2%)

Survey of 750 likely Iowa Republican Caucus participants was conducted December 28, 2011. The margin of error is +/- 4 percentage points.  Results from the poll conducted December 19, 2011 are in curly brackets. Results from the poll conducted December 13, 2011 are in square brackets.  Results from the poll conducted November 15, 2011are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted October 19, 2011are in curly brackets.  Results from the poll conducted August 31, 2011are in square brackets.  Results from the poll conducted August 4, 2011are in parentheses.

Inside the numbers:

Romney leads among Republican voters with 26% support, followed by Santorum at 19%. Gingrich and Paul each attract 15% support from Republican voters while Perry earns 12%.

Among non-Republicans who plan to participate, Paul dominates with 38% of the vote. Romney is a distant second among non-Republicans at 15% followed by Perry at 14%.

Forty-one percent (41%) of all caucus participants say they still could change their minds, and six percent (6%) more have no first preference, suggesting that much could still change in the next five days..

Among voters who could still change their minds, Romney remains the leading second choice with 20% support. Perry and Santorum are next with 17% support each, followed by Gingrich and Paul who both earn 12% of the vote. Bachmann is the second choice of nine percent (9%) of those caucus participants who could change their mind, while three percent (3%) would opt for Huntsman.

Sixty-one percent (61%) have a favorable opinion of Santorum, 60% say the same of Romney and 58% offer a positive view of Perry earn the highest favorable ratings from likely caucus-goers. Just 49% have a positive opinion of Paul and only 45% say the same of Gingrich.

At the other extreme, 27% have a Very Unfavorable opinion of Gingrich while 24% say the same of Paul. Those figures are roughly double the number with highly negative views of Romney and Santorum.

Romney also continues to be the GOP candidate that caucus-goers consider the strongest potential challenger against President Obama. He now outdistances Gingrich who is considered the second strongest contender by a two-to-one margin – 37% to 19%. Two weeks ago, Romney and Gingrich ran even on this question.

Paul and Bachmann are viewed by 25% as the two weakest potential challengers.

–Data compilation and analysis courtesy of The Argo Journal

InsiderAdvantage/Majority Opinion Research (R) Iowa 2012 GOP Caucus Poll

• Ron Paul 17.3% {23.9%} [16.5%] (13.3%) {11.4%} [8.7%] (9.6%)
• Mitt Romney 17.2% {18.2%} [11.9%] (11.5%) {18.7%} [14.9%] (18.1%)
• Newt Gingrich 16.7% {12.9%} [27.1%] (28.1%) {14.5%} [11.7%] (12.1%)
• Rick Santorum 13.4% {2.9%} [6.8%] (3.3%) {3.4%}
• Michele Bachmann 11.8% {10.1%} [10.3%] (10.1%) {5.4%} [7.8%] (11.0%)
• Rick Perry 10.5% {15.5%} [13.2%] (6.6%) {8.8%} [5.6%] (5.8%)
• Jon Huntsman 2.8% {3.8%} [3.6%] [1.9%] (0.9%)
• Someone else 3.0% {0.8%} [1.4%] (3.2%) {1.7%} [5.5%] (3.0%)
• No opinion 7.3% {11.9%} [9.2%] (14.1%) {12.8%} [14.2%] (13.1%)

Among Republicans

• Mitt Romney 20.7% {19.7%}
  
• Newt Gingrich 18.0% {14.9%}
• Rick Santorum 13.6% {3.0%}
• Michele Bachmann 12.8% {11.4%}
• Rick Perry 11.5% {15.0%}
• Ron Paul 10.9% {21.9%}
• Jon Huntsman 2.6% {1.4%}
• Someone else 1.3% {0.3%}
• No opinion 8.7% {12.4%}

Among Independents

• Ron Paul 32.9% {27.8%}
• Rick Santorum 14.6% {2.3%}
• Newt Gingrich 12.8% {8.4%}
• Mitt Romney 9.5% {16.6%}
• Rick Perry 9.1% {18.7%}
• Michele Bachmann 7.3% {7.5%}
• Jon Huntsman 3.0% {8.6%}
• Someone else 6.9% {0.6%}
• No opinion 3.7% {9.5%}

Survey of 429 likely Iowa GOP caucus-goers was conducted December 28, 2011.  Party ID: 69.5% Republican; 27.3% Independent; 3.3% Democrat.  Results from the poll conducted December 18, 2011 are in curly brackets.  Results from the poll conducted December 12, 2011 are in square brackets.  Results from the poll conducted November 28, 2011are in parentheses.  Results from the poll conducted November 8, 2011 are in curly brackets.  Results from the poll conducted November 3, 2011 are in square brackets.  Results from the poll conducted October 16, 2011 are in parentheses.

–Data compilation and analysis courtesy of The Argo Journal

Super-PACs are one of the things that happen when well-meaning people decide that they are going to remove money from politics. They don’t stop and think that what they are really doing is attempting to limit political speech, which is anathema to the American system. Politics requires money, and Americans want to give money to the candidate, party and cause of their choice. So the money is going to flow from the source to the need no matter how many dams high-minded but short-sighted souls erect to stop it.

Currently their favorite tactic is to limit the amount any one person can donate. All this really accomplishes is to force our elected representatives to spend inordinate amounts of time raising a bucket load of cash one thimble-full at a time, and enable the rise of the “bundlers”. It also creates and feeds the Frankenstein monster known as the Super-PAC.

Super-PACs have no donation limit. They do, however, have the restriction that no candidate or party may control, coordinate with, communicate to, or influence them in any way, shape or form. That rule creates a loose cannon that can end up hurting the very candidate they were created to help.

Two examples from this year’s election illustrate my point: (more…)

Rasmussen 2012 Presidential Poll

• Mitt Romney 45% [41%] (43%) {45%} [40%] (38%) {42%} [41%] (44%) {42%} [41%] (44%) {41%} [43%] (39%) {38%} [43%] {40%} [44%] (44%)
• Barack Obama 39% [44%] (42%) {42%} [42%] (44%) {43%} [42%] (42%) {43%} [43%] (42%) {44%} [40%] (43%) {46%} [42%] {45%} [42%] (44%)

Survey of 1,000 likely voters was conducted December 27-28, 2011.  The margin of error is +/- 3 percentage points.  Results from the poll conducted December 20-21, 2011 are in square brackets.  Results from the poll conducted December 14-15, 2011 are in parentheses.  Results from the poll conducted December 8-9, 2011 are in curly brackets.  Results from the poll conducted November 30 – December 1, 2011 are in square brackets.  Results from the poll conducted November 21-22, 2011 are in parentheses.  Results from the poll conducted November 9-10, 2011 are in curly brackets. Results from the poll conductedNovember 1-2, 2011 are in square brackets.  Results from the poll conducted October 24-25, 2011 are in parentheses.  Results from the poll conducted October 16-17, 2011 are in curly brackets.  Results from the poll conducted October 8-9, 2011 are in square brackets.  Results from the poll conducted September 28-29, 2011 are in parentheses.  Results from the poll conducted September 18-19, 2011 are in curly brackets.  Results from the poll conducted September 10-11, 2011 are in square brackets.  Results from the poll conducted August 25-26, 2011 are in parentheses.  Results from the polls conducted August 17-22, 2011 are in curly brackets.  Results from the polls conducted between July 14-15, 2011 are in square brackets.  Results from the poll conducted March 6-9, 2011 are in curly brackets. Results from the poll conducted January 3-4, 2011 are in square brackets. Results from the poll conducted November 24, 2009 are in parentheses.

–Data compilation and analysis courtesy of The Argo Journal

As a pundit, I should not admit this, but it is much more interesting when actual voters express themselves in an election, and particularly, in a presidential election. Not only is it more interesting, it is much more fun. We pundits are really a dour lot who tire ourselves out by wagging our fingers at the candidates and everyone in sight (that is, when we are not simply holding up our fingers in the air trying to determine political wind direction and velocity).

Now, of course, comes the heavy lifting, i.e., interpreting what the voters mean by their votes (as if we can’t take their selections at face value).

It is, to be fair, worth trying to translate a result in the Iowa caucus, where there are multiple candidates who will get a noticeable percentage of caucus votes, and the winner will likely receive only about a quarter of the total.

The sober news is that despite their huge egos which propelled them into the race in the first place, several candidates will call it quits after Iowa, or soon thereafter, not only because of a poor showing, but equally or more importantly, because they are out of cash (and unlikely to receive much more).

Cash is not so important in the long run-up to Iowa and New Hampshire, especially after the 2012 cycle innovation of numerous pre-primary/caucus debates, most of them telecast nationally. The biggest winner of that phenomenon in 2011, Newt Gingrich, will now see if it pays off when votes are cast. In 2004, Howard Dean was the sensation of the internet phenomenon of that cycle, but fell short when the votes Iowa came in. On the other hand, Barack Obama got attention in the grass roots cycle in 2008, won Iowa, and took it to the White House.

But cash is very important as contending candidates go from primary state to primary state, states which offer little time or opportunity for “retail” campaigning.

Several pundits, myself included, have offered up the possibility that the 2012 Republican nomination contest might go on longer than expected, even (horrors!) possibly all the way to Tampa and the GOP convention. It’s still possible, but the (brief?) Ron Paul bubble has sobered up the conservatives who want, most of all, to replace Mr. Obama with one of their own, and a coalescing around the two leading candidates, Mr. Romney and Mr. Gingrich, seems to be taking place. If I might guess, Mr. Romney has the advantage in this process, although Newt-as-Lazarus cannot be be finally dismissed until (if you will pardon the adaption) the elephant lady sings.

If Mr. Romney does win the Iowa caucus by whatever margin, he will win New Hampshire the next week by a much bigger margin, and then head into South Carolina with a full army. General Gingrich will then have to re-stage ”crossing the Delaware” to a state that does not resemble colonial New Jersey, and win there so to fight credibly soon after in Florida (which resembles no state in American history) with its large sub-groups of the elderly, several generations of Cuban-American refugees, recent South and Central American emigres, Jewish retirees from further north on the East Coast, American blacks and Haitian-American settlers, Panhandle blue collar whites, Seminole American Indians, and outposts of very affluent voters on both the west and east coasts of the peninsula.

Neither a General Washington, Grant nor Marshall would be able to stop one candidate’s tidal wave, should it develop.

Hurricanes form suddenly in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean or the Gulf of Mexico before heading to the mainland on an unpredictable course. The storm of the 2012 election is now forming in the midwestern state of Iowa. Because the primary/caucus season has a known itinerary, we know this storm’s course, but we don’t yet know its name.

_____________________________________________________________________________

-Please visit Mr. Casselman’s personal site.

Here’s Governor Romney’s latest TV ad in Iowa called “Freedom and Opportunity”. According to The Hill this is looking like the former Massachusetts Governor’s closing argument in Iowa.

With just days to go before Republicans begin to head to the polls in order to pick their 2012 presidential nominee, Gov. Mitt Romney appears to be in an ideal position to go in for an early kill and snatch the nomination. He is either ahead in Iowa or in a very close second place to Ron Paul, he’s way ahead in New Hampshire, and he benefits from the inability of any one of the “Four Horsemen of the Teapocalypse,” i.e., Gingrich, Bachmann, Perry, or Santorum, from breaking out of the pack as a clear choice for conservatives in South Carolina who want neither a Mormon from Massachusetts nor a dovish libertarian to head the ticket. As such, it’s entirely possible that Romney will sweep the early contests and become the de facto nominee by February.

But what happens if Romney wins? I don’t just mean the nomination, I mean the whole thing — what happens if Romney garners the nomination, goes onto defeat President Obama in November, and becomes our nation’s 45th president in 2013? The conventional wisdom seems to be that Romney will settle into his job as a milquetoast, caretaker president, simply holding court until a saner generation of leaders can emerge from the muck left behind by the cartoonish candidates that represent the last hurrah of the Baby Boomers. But I would argue that such a view completely misreads the amount of public angst that exists on the ground due to economic and demographic changes that will require strong, bold, decisive leadership over the next few years, regardless of who is president. If Romney wins, he’ll have to be more than a caretaker. He’ll have to move mountains.

In the recently released trailer to The Dark Knight Rises, Anne Hathaway, portraying Catwoman, remarks to Batman’s alter ego that “there’s a storm coming, Mr. Wayne.” Christopher Nolan, who prefers that this particular “Batman” series be topical and modern, appears to be writing Hathaway’s “Catwoman” as an “Occupy Wall Street” type who is fed up with the lack of wealth and prosperity on the ground. And the thing is, she’s right. There is indeed a storm coming should the nation spend another five years in a state of economic malaise. At that point, we may very well be approaching a revolutionary moment in America, one that could usher into power a quasi-strongman of a president in 2016 who promises to replace freedom and dynamism with security and certainty.

If Obama wins, the threat of a Trump-style strongman emerging from the Right will once again rear its head. But as in 2012, the reality probably is that Republican voters are just too sensible to nominate someone like Trump, whose tenor and tone are similar to that of a two-bit dictator of a washed up banana republic. But what if Romney wins? If Romney wins, and fails to jump start the economy, the “Occupy” movement becomes the new Tea Party as the main source of the out party’s energy and ground game, and as the primary voice of public anger. A failed President Romney would be almost the perfect foil for the Left in a jobless America, complete with an increasing number of young adults unable to live as adults due to a dearth of entry-level jobs, a growing number of non-whites, equally impoverished, and all convinced that Republicans hate them due to their skin color, and a budding generation of professional, Sex-and-the-City urban and suburban women, who have no use for stodgy old Republican moralists, and who all but think that “Plan B” should be dumped into the nation’s water supply. That combination of leading demographic indicators favoring the Democrats and a seemingly Aristocratic Republican president presiding over a stagnant economy would be enough to make Elizabeth freakin’ Warren president in 2016.

Don’t think it couldn’t happen. The number of Republicans who predicted that the nation would never elect a post-racial president named “Barack Hussein Obama” were countless, and yet such a candidate won the nation with a greater share of the popular vote than any Democratic president since Lyndon Johnson. The idea that America won’t elect a true leftist fails to take into account the reality that the U.S. is an ever-changing nation, and that demographic changes plus economic woes often yield surprising results. A failed Republican president in 2012 could lead to a president in 2016 who is positioned farther left than any president in American history, and who would use his or her term(s) to complete the Great Society and the Cultural Revolution.

If Romney wins, he has to do whatever it takes to get the economy moving again. Whatever it takes. It will be his job to swim, not sink. Because if he sinks, the nation will change forever in ways that we can now only imagine.

Ron Paul has to be happy about this coup. Michele Bachmann’s Iowa chairman (now former), State Senator Kent Sorensen (R-Indianola) has decided to switch his support from Bachmann to Congressman Paul, saying “Ron Paul has established himself as the clear choice.” In a switch that was as amicable as could be, Sen. Sorensen stated he maintains immense respect for Rep. Bachmann, but noted:

“The fact is, there is a clear top tier in the race for the Republican nomination for President, both here in Iowa and nationally. Ron Paul is easily the most conservative of this group. … If you are as frustrated as I am with what’s been done by the ruling class, I urge you to join me in supporting Dr. Paul. We can send the national big government political establishment a message they will never forget by voting for Ron Paul for President in the January 3 Iowa Caucuses.”

6 days until Iowa…

Intrade

Romney to win GOP nomination: 74.5
Paul to win GOP nomination: 7.6
Gingrich to win GOP Nomination: 4.9
Obama to win reelection: 52.2
Iowa Caucuses Winner: Paul 56.9 – Romney 32.9 – Rick Santorum 7.5
New Hampshire Primary Winner: Romney 79.1 – Paul 13.0 – Huntsman 2.9
South Carolina Primary Winner: Romney 40.0 – Gingrich 22.0 – Paul 13.0

Polling:

Obama Approval (RCP): 46.8% / 48.2% (-1.4%)
GOP Nomination (RCP): Gingrich +2.6
Gallup Daily Tracking GOP Nomination: Gingrich 25%, Romney 25%

And as always, have at it in the comments. Anything goes…