Rasmussen 2012 Daily Presidential Tracking Poll
- Barack Obama 46%
- Rick Santorum 43%
- Barack Obama 47%
- Mitt Romney 41%
- Barack Obama 46% (46%) {47%} [48%] (48%) {47%} [47%] (48%) {49%} [49%] (48%) {46%} [46%] (44%) {46%} [48%] (48%) {46%} [47%] (45%) {45%}
- Rick Santorum 43% (44%) {44%} [42%] (40%) {41%} [41%] (42%) {41%} [41%] (41%) {42%} [42%] (45%) {44%} [40%] (38%) {39%} [37%] (34%) {31%}
- Barack Obama 47% (45%) {46%} [47%] (49%) {48%} [47%] (47%) {49%} [48%] (48%) {49%} [50%] (48%) {47%} [48%] (49%) {47%}[46%] (45%) {46%} [47%] (47%) {47%} [45%] (46%) {45%} [46%] (46%) {46%} [45%] (44%)
- Mitt Romney 41% (43%) {42%} [43%] (41%) {42%} [43%] (43%) {42%} [42%] (41%) {42%} [40%] (42%) {43%} [42%] (42%) {43%} [44%] (45%) {45%} [43%] (42%) {41%} [43%] (42%) {42%} [43%] (43%) {43%} [43%] (44%)
Survey of 1,500 likely voters was conducted February 19-21, 2012. The margin of error is +/- 3 percentage points. Daily tracking results are collected via telephone surveys of 500 likely voters per night and reported on a three-day rolling average basis. To reach those who have abandoned traditional landline telephones, Rasmussen Reports uses an online survey tool to interview randomly selected participants from a demographically diverse panel. Results from the poll conducted February 18-20, 2012 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted February 17-19, 2012 are in curly brackets. Results from the poll conducted February 16-18, 2012 are in square brackets. Results from the poll conducted February 15-17, 2012 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted February 14-16, 2012 are in curly brackets. Results from the poll conducted February 13-15, 2012 are in square brackets. Results from the poll conducted February 12-14, 2012 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted February 11-13, 2012 are in curly brackets. Results from the poll conducted February 10-12, 2012 are in square brackets. Results from the poll conducted February 9-11, 2012 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conductedFebruary 8-10, 2012 are in curly brackets. Results from the poll conducted February 7-9, 2012 are in square brackets. Results from the poll conducted February 6-8, 2012 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted February 5-7, 2012 are in curly brackets. Results from the poll conducted February 4-6, 2012 are in square brackets. Results from the poll conducted February 3-5, 2012 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted February 2-4, 2012 are in square brackets. Results from the poll conducted February 1-3, 2012 are in square brackets. Results from the poll conducted January 31 – February 2, 2012 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted January 30 – February 1, 2012 are in curly brackets. Results from the poll conductedJanuary 29-31, 2012 are in square brackets. Results from the poll conducted January 28-30, 2012 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted January 27-29, 2012 are in curly brackets. Results from the poll conducted January 26-28, 2012 are in square brackets. Results from the poll conducted January 25-27, 2012 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted January 24-26, 2012 are in curly brackets. Results from the poll conducted January 23-25, 2012 are in square brackets. Results from the poll conducted January 22-24, 2012are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted January 21-23, 2012 are in curly brackets. Results from the poll conducted January 20-22, 2012 are in square brackets. Results from the poll conductedJanuary 17-21, 2012 are in parentheses.
–Data compilation and analysis courtesy of The Argo Journal
February 22nd, 2012 at 1:50 pm
Obama should have his knees knocking.
February 22nd, 2012 at 1:57 pm
Here’s a summary of Mitt’s new tax plan:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/post/romneys-tax-plan-not-obama-not-santorum-maybe-doable/2012/02/22/gIQA35EVTR_blog.html
February 22nd, 2012 at 1:57 pm
All the elites say Santorum will win the Michigan primary but it ain’t over yet. Still time for the Comeback kid Romney.
Lets’s spoil Rush and Sarah’s day on the 28th.
Give em severe hell Mitt!
February 22nd, 2012 at 2:01 pm
Seriously, the ABR’s are desperately propping up Santorum and bringing down Romney in these polls. Romney has always lead Obama, until now, when the ABR’s (and relgious nevermind) are desperate to take him down.
No doubt, Hannity and the rest of the Fox News propagandists will only show this poll night, and ignore the MI and AZ polls showing Romney leading, and no doubt they will ignore that Romney got the endorsements of Michigan’s two largest newspapers.
February 22nd, 2012 at 2:03 pm
Everybody knows Rasmussen is just a front for Daily Kos…..
Ah, cheer up Rombots. It’s just one day.
February 22nd, 2012 at 2:05 pm
Firecracker,
You realize Mitt wouldn’t be where he is today if Fox and Talk Radio weren’t blocking and tackling for him in ’08?
I mean, you’re bemoaning the very tactics that made Mitt the heir apparent.
February 22nd, 2012 at 2:06 pm
Ronmey is gaining again and Rick dropping. Roles should be reversed by primary time
February 22nd, 2012 at 2:07 pm
6. Matt, I’d rather they reported fairly in both 08 and 12, rather than block and tackle for one candidate over another.
If they did that, I think Mitt would have done no worse in 08 and would be doing much better, today.
February 22nd, 2012 at 2:08 pm
Bunk!
February 22nd, 2012 at 2:08 pm
Republicans win in either case, given the predilections of undecideds in voting booths.
But Santorum won’t stay at this level. Check it out in another couple of weeks.
February 22nd, 2012 at 2:09 pm
If Santorum, known as pro-choice up-and-comer, can convert to pro-life, so too can many others. I hope that he can share more about his conversion story, prompted by his run for congress, so that others can benefit and maybe change their tune as well.
February 22nd, 2012 at 2:11 pm
You can alreadt see the enthusiasm for Santorum starting to diminish as he goes about defending remarks about women, religion, Satan, big-spending, etc. He is doing a lot of explaining these days. The February unemployment numbers are also turning the debate back to the economy again/
February 22nd, 2012 at 2:21 pm
I want to thank Keith Price for the link in #2. Mitt’s new economic plan avoided all of my worst fears, and significantly improved on what was already an impressive economic agenda.
He either got some of it from Paul Ryan, or maybe it’s just that great minds think alike.
February 22nd, 2012 at 2:23 pm
PublicPolicyPolling @ppppolls
Santorum polling a point better than Romney v. Obama in AZ another indicator electability difference may be minimal
February 22nd, 2012 at 2:30 pm
The Romney supporters are losing their last hold on why anyone should vote for Mitt: He is no longer the candidate more likely to beat Obama. Crazy.
February 22nd, 2012 at 2:30 pm
Here’s an email I just sent to GOP12.com in response to an article saying Mitt has a trust gap:
February 22nd, 2012 at 2:31 pm
14. FOTM will always poll well against Obama until FOTM gets vetted. Wait 2 weeks when the hype ends and Rick will look similar to Newt vs Obama.
February 22nd, 2012 at 2:36 pm
ABRs have lost that a long, long time ago..
Washington insiders
Pork lovers
Fannie and Freddie enthusiast
Climate change enthusiasts
Healthcare mandates
Etc..etc…etc..
ABRS have stood for very little but competence.
February 22nd, 2012 at 2:36 pm
Debate will decide the fate of the race. Forget all polls out today for either Romney or Santorum’s benefit.
February 22nd, 2012 at 2:36 pm
14. You know that PPP is a democratic pollster and does its best to portray Romney negatively. What will be there excuse when Romney wins AZ by 8-12 points?
February 22nd, 2012 at 2:37 pm
18 for 15.
February 22nd, 2012 at 2:38 pm
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/02/22/polls-indicate-romney-on-the-rise-in-arizona/
A CNN/Time/ORC International poll released Tuesday indicated a closer race in Arizona, with Romney at 36%, Santorum at 32%, Gingrich at 18% and Paul at 6%. Romney’s four-point advantage is within the survey’s sampling error.
The CNN survey was conducted Friday through Monday, and when you break down the numbers, Romney appears to gain ground while Santorum loses support. Looking just at the sample from Friday and Saturday, Santorum edges out Romney 36%-35%. But the figures from Sunday and Monday tell a different story, with Romney holding a 38%-26% advantage over Santorum.
“That pattern reflects what several other publicly-released polls indicate,” says CNN Polling Director Keating Holland. “Other polls that include data from last week show a fairly close race, but polls that were done entirely this week show double-digit leads for Romney. The interviews conducted in the CNN/Time poll straddled both periods.”
CNN didn’t mention this at all even though they mentioned this when there was the same big difference in their florida polling.
CNN will do whatever it takes to protect Santorum as they see they have an oppurtunity to knock Romney out.
February 22nd, 2012 at 2:40 pm
Rick Santorum, The Food Stamp Senator
http://www.verumserum.com/?p=38111
This vetting process of the not Romneys sure is fun.
February 22nd, 2012 at 2:41 pm
14
Well, the Marist poll had things totally different. The Marist poll has Romney beating Obama by 5 in AZ, and Santorum LOSING by 3 in AZ.
PPP = hackjob
February 22nd, 2012 at 2:44 pm
This is the Mitt I will be looking for in tonight’s debate:
http://cdn.theatlanticwire.com/img/upload/2012/02/22/bfr.gif
February 22nd, 2012 at 2:51 pm
#25…LOL Telly
February 22nd, 2012 at 2:53 pm
6
Oh, you’re so right, MWS!! (The sarcasm is so thick it’s causing me to froth at the mouth, now). I should be so greatful to them for making Mitt a viable candidate! They gave him his business prowess, economic experience, and leadership ability. Oh, where would he be without them?! Rush, Fox, et al also made it possible for Mitt to save the Olympics and turn around MA’s budget woes. And this based on them having the graciousness to talk about it back then… now we all know that since they don’t talk about those things this go round, they didn’t really happen, or at least not the way the facts might lead you to believe.
And here I thought they were just being sensible in rejecting McCain, who was basically center left until he ran for POTUS again.
Mitt is going to become POTUS, and when he does, he’s not going to owe favors to anybody but the American people.
February 22nd, 2012 at 2:55 pm
25
Much better than the frowning and crying and whining that’s going to be happening around him.
February 22nd, 2012 at 2:59 pm
#27 Mark
“Mitt is going to become POTUS, and when he does, he’s not going to owe favors to anybody but the American people.”
That’s the Mitt I know, he wouldn’t want it any other way.
February 22nd, 2012 at 3:02 pm
Wonder if this will come up at the debate?
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/291696/santorum-adviser-why-mormonism-limits-katrina-trinko
February 22nd, 2012 at 3:03 pm
Mark,
The fact is, the same people you’re complaining about blocking and tackling for Rick, were doing it for Mitt.
Are you saying it’s effective now, but didn’t matter then?
February 22nd, 2012 at 3:04 pm
Tommy Thompson had an impressive resume, and he didn’t get anywhere.
February 22nd, 2012 at 3:04 pm
“Mitt is going to become POTUS, and when he does, he’s not going to owe favors to anybody but the American people.”
I have never considered Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan Chase “the American people”
Weird.
go figure
February 22nd, 2012 at 3:06 pm
31
Are you saying that the blatant hypocrisy in that isn’t cause to discount what they are doing now AND what they did then?
February 22nd, 2012 at 3:09 pm
33
Well, they are Americans. But what’s weird is you thinking he somehow owes them something. I mean, first off, they donate more to Obama. Second off, Mitt never worked on Wall Street – the connection just isn’t there. Just because you repeat something enough times doesn’t make it true.
Stalin talked about “Quantity having a quality all it’s own”… that’s the tactic you’re trying to use.
February 22nd, 2012 at 3:10 pm
3, Nostrodamus and 4, Firecracker.
Your remarks about the Michigan polls are problematic, after taking a close look at the evidence.
I’ve spent the last two hours crunching numbers and running scenarios based on the following nine polls: WZZM (taken 2/11-13), Rasmussen (2/13), MRG (2/13-14), ARG (2/15-16), PPP (2/17-19), We Ask America (WAA) (2/19), NBC/Marist (2/19-20), Rasmussen 2/20) and Rosetta (2/20).
And I’ve come to the conclusion that the reports of Santorum’s death are greatly exaggerated.
First, let’s take a look at the candidates’ CPSRs starting with WZZM and going through the PPP survey (a 2/11-19 period), at which point there was still broad consensus. Here those are, with trends added from the previous polls taken 11/13-1/25 (WXYZ, Strategic National and EPIC):
MICHIGAN Composite 2/11-19 Final
1. Santorum 37.5-38.4 +29.4-34.5
2. Romney 29-34.5
3. Paul 11-11.5
4. Gingrich 7.5-14 -11.75-18.6
5. Undecided 8-10 -2.9-11.1
As you can see, the conclusion appears to be inescapable that at that time Santorum and Romney, between them, enjoyed the support of over half of the primary’s likely voters, and that Santorum was leading Romney by probably around 6 or 7 points.
And then we start bumping into problems.
We’re confronted at that point with four polls that were all taken at roughly the same time, from WAA, NBC/Marist, Rasmussen and Rosetta. NBC/Marist and Rasmussen agree with each other’s candidate PSRs. WAA and Rosetta also agree with each other’s candidate PSRs.
However WAA + Rosetta DO NOT AGREE with NBC/Marist + Rasmussen.
So which combo is correct?
Well, the NBC/Marist + Rasmussen combo gives candidate CPSRs that match the CPSR picture I give above. And WAA + Rosetta DO NOT. So the numbers lead to the conclusion that NBC/Marist + Rasmussen is correct, and WAA + Rosetta is not.
Which leads to the conclusion that there has been no significant changes or alterations in trends at all since the 11th.
If that’s the case, and if one discards WAA + Rosetta, then here is the current CPSR picture, with trend markings again added based on the trifecta of polls from 11/13-1/25:
MICHIGAN Composite 2/11-20 Final
1. Santorum 37.5-38.4 +29.4-34.5
2. Romney 33.3-34.5
3. Paul 11-11.5
4. Gingrich 7.5-11.7 -14.05-18.6
5. Undecided 8-10 -2.9-11.1
Which leads us to the following startling conclusion: Not only is Santorum probably still in the lead in the state; there is also persuasive evidence that he continues to trend UP, not down.
I could actually stop here, but I’m sure there will be some who will disagree with my conclusion above, so let me try to address some of those expected criticisms.
The first objection raised will probably be something along the lines of “hey, NBC/Marist reports a lead for Romney, not Santorum; how can you possibly use that survey as a basis for claiming the opposite?”
That objection is actually answered rather easily. The NBC/Marist survey has a margin of error of +/-3.7 points. That enables us to create PSRs for Santorum and Romney in this survey of 31.3-38.7% and 33.3-40.7% respectively. Since these overlap the CPSRs derived from the other six polls that agree with NBC/Marist, one can therefore NARROW DOWN the candidates’ CPSRs by utilizing this additional information from NBC/Marist. In a nutshell, NBC/Marist’s contribution here is to raise Romney’s CPSR floor to 33.3%. We already have an even lower ceiling on Santorum from WZZM, 38.4%. Which means that my final CPSRs of 37.5-38.4% and 33.3-34.5% for Santorum and Romney do not disagree with NBC/Marist at all; in fact, to the extent that they agree with NBC/Marist, that tends to reinforce the likelihood both that NBC/Marist is correct and that my current CPSR picture for Santorum and Romney is correct.
Another objection I may hear will go something like this: “Hey (an objection always starts with hey, you know), but couldn’t NBC/Marist and Rasmussen be the outliers here instead?”
Sure they could. But that interpretation is based on two far-fetched assumptions:
1) NBC/Marist + Rasmussen is incorrect, in spite of their agreement with WZZM + Rasmussen (2/13) + MRG + ARG + PPP, and
2) WAA + Rosetta is correct, in spite of their DISAGREEMENT with WZZM + Rasmussen (2/13) + MRG + ARG + PPP.
In short, the conclusion that NBC/Marist + Rasmussen is correct demands fewer questionable assumptions than that WAA + Rosetta is correct.
To conclude, just for grins, I show below the CPSR picture that results if one concludes that I’m wrong, Nostrodamus and Firecracker are right, and WAA + Rosetta are right.
Such a CPSR picture necessarily involves a much shorter time span, 2/19-20, than the one I’ve shown you above, as well as a much smaller number of available polls (only two to be exact: the aforementioned controversial WAA and Rosetta surveys). I present it below, with trend indicators based on the previous five surveys taken between 2/11-19 (WZZM, Rasmussen (2/13), MRG, ARG and PPP):
MICHIGAN Composite 2/19-20 Final
1. Romney 27.3-32.1
2. Santorum 25.9-32.1 -5.4-12.5
3. Undecided 17.3-23.1 +7.3-15.1
4. Gingrich 6.9-13.1
4. Paul 8.9-11.7
To reiterate, I do not believe this latter CPSR picture is credible. It is based on the conclusion that WAA + Rosetta is right and that NBC/Marist + Rasmussen is wrong. I have demonstrated above that that conclusion is far-fetched and implausible.
The more plausible picture, in my opinion, remains that Santorum continues to trend up in this state, and continues to be narrowly ahead of Romney, as shown in the first CPSR picture I presented in this message.
Yeah, this was a long message. Hope it all hangs together and makes sense.
February 22nd, 2012 at 3:11 pm
31
MWS, it didn’t work in 2008 because Fox and the MSM were pulling for McCain HARD. Talk radio was outnumbered.
THIS time, ALL media outlets of consequence have been brutal to Mitt. ALL of them.
February 22nd, 2012 at 3:13 pm
Mark,
“Are you saying that the blatant hypocrisy in that isn’t cause to discount what they are doing now AND what they did then?”
If anything their blatent hypocrisy should make them less effective now.
February 22nd, 2012 at 3:20 pm
“THIS time, ALL media outlets of consequence have been brutal to Mitt. ALL of them.”
I don’t know if that’s true, But Mark H of Time Magazine said reporters do not like
Romney. And it does affect coverage. Today, for instance, his new tax plan has been
criticized not for substance, but because he is changing in mid-campaign.
As for the reason, some reporters have complained about access to the candidate.
February 22nd, 2012 at 3:23 pm
38
It should. But it doesn’t. Who’s going to call them out on it? Mitt’s not the whining type. And even if he did, who would cover it, and how would they frame it? MassCon (37) makes an excellent point – nobody is pulling for Mitt this go-round. And yet here we are, with him still as the front-runner, and him having the most delegates to date. If they were truly kingmakers back then, and their influence hasn’t really diminished, how do we explain Mitt currently winning??? (Seriously, I haven’t nailed down an answer to that that doesn’t sound like I’m worshipping Mitt’s awesomeness!)
February 22nd, 2012 at 3:26 pm
39
“I don’t know if that’s true,” -and then you go to tell us that it’s true.
Curious comment.
February 22nd, 2012 at 3:26 pm
MassCon,
Drudge is pro-Romney, and get about 1 billion more hits than Rush has listeners.
February 22nd, 2012 at 3:27 pm
39
Well, it is true. And there are studies that prove it.
An objective media would be focusing on the plan itself, not whether its release is politically motivated. Talk about the political motivation in the same article/report, but talk about the details FIRST, and tell the truth.
Chicken, or egg? Is Mitt avoiding them because they are biased, or are they biased because Mitt is avoiding them? And is it okay to give a candidate unfair coverage and slander him just because he’s running a tight ship?
February 22nd, 2012 at 3:28 pm
42
Oh come on. Few ordinary folks who pay moderate to low attention to primaries visit Drudge regularly. I didn’t even know about the site until like 5 months ago.
February 22nd, 2012 at 3:29 pm
Mark,
“how do we explain Mitt currently winning???”
Whether Mitt is currently “winning” is debatable, but your point is well taken.
I’d say he’s doing this well because 1) he’s a credible candidate in a field of mostly non-credible candidates 2) he’s run for President before, and that experience helps a lot and 3) he’s familiar and considered by many to be “Next in Line.”
February 22nd, 2012 at 3:33 pm
MassCon,
Drudge gets 3 million hits a day, on average, according to the omniscient Wikipedia.
That ain’t bad.
February 22nd, 2012 at 3:37 pm
46
Cable news gets as many as 4 million viewers AT A TIME, and tens of millions a day. And network news pulls in 10+ million viewers simultaneously at night.
Talk radio has 20+ million listeners a week.
Drudge is a drop in the bucket. No one visits his site besides political junkies and current event junkies.
February 22nd, 2012 at 3:37 pm
45
Fair enough. I’ll agree with those 3 as the biggest reasons to support Mitt for the average voter.
I’ll tell you what, though – this entire primary has confused me so much about talk radio and Fox… I never could get why they would back him in 08 as the conservative only to completely shun him in ’12. Fine to say someone else is more conservative, but to completely shun him?! Very strange. The rest of the MSM, in my mind, just want Obama reelected, so taking out the (probably) strongest candidate is completely logical.
Conservatives acting strange and liberals being logical… is everything upside down, or am I the one standing on my head??
February 22nd, 2012 at 3:38 pm
47
I’ve never been on that site unless following a link one of you have put up.
February 22nd, 2012 at 4:04 pm
I don’t watch Fox News or listen to Talk Radio anymore, so I’m taking your word for it regarding bias.
February 22nd, 2012 at 4:05 pm
50
It’s bad. And not just because I’m a Romney guy. It’s really, really bad. Everyone knows it, even the anti-Romney people. And there are objective studies to prove it.
February 22nd, 2012 at 4:55 pm
MassCon,
Dead thread, but for your edification, Drudge has had more than 30 Million hits in the last 24 hours. And that’s not much above average.
February 22nd, 2012 at 5:20 pm
42
That may be, Matt, but I’ve never seen an opinion piece about Romney from Drudge. All I’ve ever seen there are links to other people’s articles.
So, Drudge is unlikely to have as much influence as Rush because he doesn’t “interpret” the news.
February 22nd, 2012 at 5:22 pm
45
Really? Look at the delegates, so far. Look at the count of popular vote, so far. How can you come up with any other conclusion than that Mitt is “currently” winning?
Polls don’t count. Only voting.