Romney Edges Palin, Huckabee in Early 2012 GOP Test

Which Republican do you support for 2012?

  • Huckabee

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Pawlenty

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Barbour

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    10

FUCK THE POLICE

911 EVERY DAY
Also, I'm posting a poll with this thread.


http://www.gallup.com/poll/121715/Romney-Edges-Palin-Huckabee-Early-2012-GOP-Test.aspx

Romney Edges Palin, Huckabee in Early 2012 GOP Test
Palin’s favorable rating stable after announcement of her resignation
by Jeffrey M. Jones

PRINCETON, NJ -- About one in four Republicans and Republican-leaning independents make Mitt Romney their top choice for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination, giving him a slight edge over Sarah Palin and Mike Huckabee. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich is the choice of 14% of Republicans, with much smaller numbers choosing current Govs. Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota and Haley Barbour of Mississippi.

lhqxx4xsre2whknrhtq1ng.gif


These results are based on a July 10-12 Gallup Poll, which asked Republicans to choose which of six possible candidates for the Republican presidential nomination they would be most likely to support in 2012.

As of this moment, Romney, one of John McCain's chief rivals for the 2008 Republican presidential nomination, holds a slight but not statistically significant 26% to 21% advantage over Palin, who was McCain's vice presidential running mate.

Palin's strong showing suggests she remains a contender for GOP front-runner status even after her surprising decision to resign as governor of Alaska, which she announced July 3. Some have speculated that she made that decision with an eye toward running for president in 2012.

Favorable Ratings of Leading Contenders

While Palin trails Romney in the current candidate preference test, she leads both him and Huckabee in terms of their respective favorable ratings among Republicans. Currently, 72% of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents have a favorable opinion of Palin, compared with 56% for Romney and 59% for Huckabee. But her lead on this measure largely reflects the fact that she is better known than the two former governors, given the substantially lower "no opinion" figures for her. Republicans rate each candidate more positively than negatively by better than 3-to-1 ratios.

4s53p8y4kukamucatz5eba.gif


However, Huckabee's numbers among all Americans look better by comparison. Although each GOP contender receives a similar favorable rating from the American public -- 43% for Palin, 37% for Romney, and 42% for Huckabee -- Huckabee's negatives are lower. As a result, his +19 net favorable score is much better than Romney's +8 and Palin's -2.

_uabzikgq0yfcxhkqbidyq.gif


Palin's favorable rating is little changed from last November, immediately after the 2008 election. At that time, 48% viewed her favorably and 47% unfavorably. This suggests no widespread deterioration in her image after her surprising decision to resign her post as governor with more than a year left in her term.

Still, her image has suffered somewhat among Republicans during this time. In November, 81% of Republicans viewed her favorably and 14% unfavorably, compared with the current ratings of 72% favorable and 21% unfavorable after her announced resignation.

Absence Makes the Heart Grow Fonder?

Though it is little over a year since the 2008 GOP primaries, Americans' opinions of Romney and Huckabee have changed significantly. Notably, each seems to have lost a significant share of the public familiarity he built up during the campaign. There has been a double-digit increase in the percentage of Americans who do not express either a positive or a negative opinion of both Romney and Huckabee.

However, the loss in familiarity may not be a bad thing, as the increase in "no opinion" has accompanied a corresponding drop in unfavorable ratings for each, with little change in their favorable ratings. Whereas Romney was viewed significantly more negatively than positively in February 2008, about the time he suspended his campaign, now on balance Americans view him more positively due to a 17-point drop in his unfavorable ratings.

cp3kcmvoi0chzkrqzisoeq.gif


Huckabee's unfavorable scores have fallen from 38% to 23%; thus, he has moved from an almost equally balanced positive and negative image to one that is considerably more positive than negative.

ond-wnnbhk-c-kdtzlopuw.gif


The declining negatives for both Romney and Huckabee are evident among Democrats as well as Republicans.

Implications

Presidential nomination preference polls conducted roughly three years before the party's nominating convention in general would not be expected to predict the eventual nominee. At this stage, these polls to a large degree reflect respondents' familiarity with the possible contenders. For example, Rudy Giuliani led most GOP preference polls in 2007, but performed dismally in the actual primaries and caucuses.

However, these early polls do give an indication of who the likely front-runners will be heading into the campaign, which should kick off after the 2010 November midterm elections. They also provide insights into the implications of Palin's highly-publicized decision to leave her job as governor of Alaska in the middle of her term. And, the Giuliani example notwithstanding, early front-runner status in Republican nomination contests is important, because historically, that person usually has won the nomination.

To the extent Palin, Romney, and Huckabee can capitalize on their higher name recognition than that of their possible challengers to raise money and build strong campaign organizations, they will be formidable contenders should they decide to pursue the 2012 Republican presidential nomination.

Survey Methods

Results are based on telephone interviews with 1,018 national adults, aged 18 and older, conducted July 10-12, 2009. For results based on the total sample of national adults, one can say with 95% confidence that the maximum margin of sampling error is ±3 percentage points.

For results based on the sample of 455 Republicans and Republican-leaning independents, the maximum margin of sampling error is ±5 percentage points.

Interviews are conducted with respondents on land-line telephones (for respondents with a land-line telephone) and cellular phones (for respondents who are cell-phone only).

In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of public opinion polls.
 
Last edited:
I'd call that a very good sign for the Republican party. Romney is a good old fashioned center right Republican. If the RR bigots could just get over his being a Mormon Republicans would have a good leader in Mitt. Hell if Obama turns into another Jimmy Carter I'd consider voting for Mitt assuming that he or the Republican leadership can muzzle the wingnuts.
 
I'd call that a very good sign for the Republican party. Romney is a good old fashioned center right Republican. If the RR bigots could just get over his being a Mormon Republicans would have a good leader in Mitt. Hell if Obama turns into another Jimmy Carter I'd consider voting for Mitt assuming that he or the Republican leadership can muzzle the wingnuts.

I kinda like Romney, Huckabee is also alright. But I'd never vote for either of them over Obama unless Obama introduced a platform to the right of them. Mississippi has an open primary, so I'm just going to vote for the major Republican candidate I think can most easily be beat.

BTW, I would have definitely voted for Carter in 1980.
 
Last edited:
I'd call that a very good sign for the Republican party. Romney is a good old fashioned center right Republican. If the RR bigots could just get over his being a Mormon Republicans would have a good leader in Mitt. Hell if Obama turns into another Jimmy Carter I'd consider voting for Mitt assuming that he or the Republican leadership can muzzle the wingnuts.
Romney tore a hole in all other contenders in the caucuses here in Colorado. At this moment I'd prefer him to nearly any other candidate. But that can change in the eternity of three years.
 
Sarah Failin is the loser you neocon Bushlovers can come up with for President Obama to beat?

Will you even have a party by 2012?
 
no democrat nor republican represents the interests of a free America. they are opposite sides of the same fascist coin. only a totalitarian would vote for a major party.
 
Romney severely disappointed me in 2008 in terms of his character. He was fearful to defend his more liberal social positions, and he tried to run on the Bush legacy by sabrerattling about waging war on Islamofascism and "doubling Guantanamo".

He also kinda felt like a fake, which is too bad because his work On paper as Governor appears innovative in some respects that Washington could have used.

Now that the Bush era is over, everyone gets a second look, of course, but the trust for me will be very limited.

I'm actually more interested in Huckabee's growth as a candidate. Of course I strongly disagree with his social policies, but from a foreign policy perspective, I believe he will be more to my liking in a post-Iraq environment.

We have a while to go, but I really think it will take someone very different to defeat Obama in 2012. I certainly hope the country is better off by then, in which case, he will be even harder to beat.
 
Romney just looks like a President. He should de-shine the hair a bit though.

so did obama....you don't think he had an advantage over hillary for being tall, good looking...etc...

hillary had the creds over obama, but when put side to side, people when with the presidential looking candidate....and of course, not another bush/clinton/bush/clinton....but you can't deny that obama didn't use his looks and heighth looking down on hillary
 
so did obama....you don't think he had an advantage over hillary for being tall, good looking...etc...

hillary had the creds over obama, but when put side to side, people when with the presidential looking candidate....and of course, not another bush/clinton/bush/clinton....but you can't deny that obama didn't use his looks and heighth looking down on hillary



LOL, its awesome when rightwingers share their expertise in the voting choices of the Democratic Party.

Wow, if looks was such a dominant factor in the dem primary, why didn’t John Edwards wipe the floor with both Hillary and Obama?

Oh damn, another rightwing theory shot to hell.

Obama beat Hillary because of Iraq. If Clinton hadn’t voted for the Iraq war, she would be president. Obama was smart enough to know that this was the year for a candidate who never perceived as an enabler Bush, to his war, who could not credibly be tied to Bush’s foolish mistakes, and someone who was not associated with the 8 years of the Bush regime.
 
LOL, its awesome when rightwingers share their expertise in the voting choices of the Democratic Party.

Wow, if looks was such a dominant factor in the dem primary, why didn’t John Edwards wipe the floor with both Hillary and Obama?

Oh damn, another rightwing theory shot to hell.

Obama beat Hillary because of Iraq. If Clinton hadn’t voted for the Iraq war, she would be president. Obama was smart enough to know that this was the year for a candidate who never perceived as an enabler Bush, to his war, who could not credibly be tied to Bush’s foolish mistakes, and someone who was not associated with the 8 years of the Bush regime.

are you stupid? love how you classify me as a right winger....you're displaying hack qualities....nice job

you're not being racist by saying edwards is better looking than obama are you....oh....no, because you are a dem.....moron, do you not remember his affair

and hillary was actually stronger than obama on iraq, obama showed himself to be a wimp....but people wanted a leader, a good looking, clean leader and someone different than bush/clinton/bush/clinton

for you to ignore that is bizarre
 
I'm actually more interested in Huckabee's growth as a candidate. Of course I strongly disagree with his social policies, but from a foreign policy perspective, I believe he will be more to my liking in a post-Iraq environment.

Huckabee is much more compassionate and less of an asshole than your average Republican. He has a more even head on his shoulders. He's not part of the ultra-nasty streak that has come to dominate conservatism and is best represented by Palin. Of course, his religious views are over the top, but then again so is Romney's.

Of course, Huckabee is the sort of mediocore candidate that no one strongly dislikes or likes, so I don't think he's going to pull through.
 
all i have to say about romney to the liberals is that he was elected in MASSACHSETTS. that should tell you enough of how he's able to work with everyone.
 
Huckabee is much more compassionate and less of an asshole than your average Republican. He has a more even head on his shoulders. He's not part of the ultra-nasty streak that has come to dominate conservatism and is best represented by Palin. Of course, his religious views are over the top, but then again so is Romney's.

Of course, Huckabee is the sort of mediocore candidate that no one strongly dislikes or likes, so I don't think he's going to pull through.

seriously.....as if there is no streak among the dems

dems have been attacking for 8 years, yet now, only now, it bothers you that the other side of the aisle dare speak.....dude
 
How come Bobby Jindal isn't in the poll? I think Mitt is starting to grow in GOP appeal compared to where he was in 2007/2008. Now he just needs to win enough Patrician states to compensate for Huckabee beating him throughout the South...
 
How come Bobby Jindal isn't in the poll? I think Mitt is starting to grow in GOP appeal compared to where he was in 2007/2008. Now he just needs to win enough Patrician states to compensate for Huckabee beating him throughout the South...

Jindal took a nosedive after that primetime response; people went overboard w/ it, but that's politics.

It's hard to imagine Romney winning; he couldn't have had a better set-up than 2008, and he still couldn't get the nod.

Right now, I'm guessing Palin, since the base gets genuinely excited about her. However, given the timeframe, it could be someone we've barely heard of at this point.
 
Jindal took a nosedive after that primetime response; people went overboard w/ it, but that's politics.

It's hard to imagine Romney winning; he couldn't have had a better set-up than 2008, and he still couldn't get the nod.

Right now, I'm guessing Palin, since the base gets genuinely excited about her. However, given the timeframe, it could be someone we've barely heard of at this point.

Romney only lost because he was viewed as less of a reformer than McCain. With McCain gone, he is the official outisider candidate. Plus, 2008 was not so golden for him, because he was surrounded by a cast of celebrities to include McCain, Thompson, Huckabee, and Giuliani. Now, the celebrity fold consists of Palin and Jindal, and Huckabee is just another guy now...
 
∞zo;471443 said:
all i have to say about romney to the liberals is that he was elected in MASSACHSETTS. that should tell you enough of how he's able to work with everyone.

I'm still voting for him under pretty much no circumstances that I can think of.
 
How come Bobby Jindal isn't in the poll?

Not sure; it's possible they put him in the poll, and he didn't get enough votes to be considered statistically relevant. It's also possible that anyone could give any answer they desired.

If they really just didn't include him in the list, it would be pretty odd.
 
Back
Top