• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Gallup: Romney support collapsing nationally among Republicans

BobStackFan4Life

BobStackFan4Life

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 17, 2011
Messages
31,661
Reaction score
1,538
They're just not enthusiastic about the guy. If Santorum and Paul would drop out I think there is a fair chance Gingrich could win this thing. But I read Paul will not drop out- he has plenty of money and wants to collect as many delegates as possible for the Republican convention.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/152126/Romney-National-Lead-Down-Points.aspx
Mitt Romney is a considerably weaker front-runner among Republican registered voters nationally than he was at the beginning of the week. Romney now leads Newt Gingrich by 30% to 20%, with Rick Santorum and Ron Paul tied at 13%. At the beginning of the week, Romney had a 23-percentage-point lead over Gingrich and Santorum.
Click to expand...
 
There is zero enthusiasm for Romney even among those who would reluctantly vote for him. Contrast that with the enthusiasm of Ron Paul supporters.
 
If Newt is the nominee., I will predict that the Dems take back the House. I'll also change my prediction of Obama winning with about 300EV to closing ion 400.
 
RJKarl said:
If Newt is the nominee., I will predict that the Dems take back the House. I'll also change my prediction of Obama winning with about 300EV to closing ion 400.
Click to expand...

Newt is not going to win but if by some miracle he does I think you might be right.
 
The longer Newt is in, the weaker Rmoney is and the shorter his coattails are.

The Dem talkingheads are already hammering "Romney was 47th in job creation in MA as governor. His successor was 5th."

If they spend millions on this sound bite, how does Romney's, "I am a job creator" justification survive?

Other than "I'm not Obama" that is his only "strength".
 
This is what Republican strategist told Politico:
Another Republican operative who has worked against Romney this cycle said there’s simply “no pressure being placed on folks to drop out,” at least at this stage.

“Romney will withstand the weak attempts to knock him down a peg or two and when it’s Ron Paul and Mitt, folks will go with Mitt in enough numbers to give him the nod,” the strategist said, predicting of the general election: “Most of the energy will go into the House, Senate and state races, leaving Mitt with the high cost of buying or renting his Astroturf support in the general.”
Click to expand...
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0112/71723_Page3.html
 
Hello said:
I know it's totally different, but do you think that the lengthy primary that Obama endured strengthened him as a candidate?
Click to expand...

You can't compare the two primary situations. Obama versus Hillary was most civil and each was an excellent candidate. Neither Newt nor Romney can claim this.

Plus Newt is doing general election damage to Romney. Futhermore, if Newt somehow would beat Romney, the GOP is big trouble.

If this goes past Super Tuesday, Romney may need to be replaced.
 
RJKarl said:
You can't compare the two primary situations. Obama versus Hillary was most civil and each was an excellent candidate. Neither Newt nor Romney can claim this.

Plus Newt is doing general election damage to Romney. Futhermore, if Newt somehow would beat Romney, the GOP is big trouble.

If this goes past Super Tuesday, Romney may need to be replaced.
Click to expand...

I said it was totally different. The real question is, did the long primary improve President Obama's campaign?

I know you love Hilldawg, but she is not going to be the 2016 candidate for the democrats. She couldn't beat a guy who was a state senator 4 years prior, and that's because she's too polarizing. My money is on Mark Warner.
 
Hello said:
I said it was totally different. The real question is, did the long primary improve President Obama's campaign?

I know you love Hilldawg, but she is not going to be the 2016 candidate for the democrats. She couldn't beat a guy who was a state senator 4 years prior, and that's because she's too polarizing. My money is on Mark Warner.
Click to expand...

Kirsten Gillibrand
 
They started talking about Jeb Bush on CNN...one dude even suggested he should run. I almost shot milk out of my nose.
 
Hello said:
I said it was totally different. The real question is, did the long primary improve President Obama's campaign?

I know you love Hilldawg, but she is not going to be the 2016 candidate for the democrats. She couldn't beat a guy who was a state senator 4 years prior, and that's because she's too polarizing. My money is on Mark Warner.
Click to expand...

Thanks for rthe laugh. the "state senator" wowed the nation in 2004 and was an historical figure.

It's not that I "love" Hilldawg. it's that she's going to win in 2016. For the past decade America has voted her the most admired in the country every year.

Warner might be Hillary's VP. I'd take Scweitzer from MT.
 
RJKarl said:
Thanks for rthe laugh. the "state senator" wowed the nation in 2004 and was an historical figure.

It's not that I "love" Hilldawg. it's that she's going to win in 2016. For the past decade America has voted her the most admired in the country every year.

Warner might be Hillary's VP. I'd take Scweitzer from MT.
Click to expand...

She won't. Just like I called Obama back in 2005 (ask anyone that knows me in real life), i'm calling this one: Hillary won't win the nomination in 4 years.
 
How is someone that is still alive a "historical figure?"
 
Hello said:
She won't. Just like I called Obama back in 2005 (ask anyone that knows me in real life), i'm calling this one: Hillary won't win the nomination in 4 years.
Click to expand...

If she runs, she wins. Her only real competition would be Andrew Cuomo.

If she runs, Warner won't run against her. He's too smart.

What she'll see is the chance to put her mark on the nation for the next thirty years. Whomever wins in 2016 will likely replace Scalia and Kenedy. each will be 83 yo (almost 84 on innuaguration day). It would be a 6-3 Dem Court.

She will want to do this.
 
RJKarl said:
If she runs, she wins. Her only real competition would be Andrew Cuomo.

If she runs, Warner won't run against her. He's too smart.

What she'll see is the chance to put her mark on the nation for the next thirty years. Whomever wins in 2016 will likely replace Scalia and Kenedy. each will be 83 yo (almost 84 on innuaguration day). It would be a 6-3 Dem Court.

She will want to do this.
Click to expand...

We shall see. Lots of politics to be played in between now and then.
 
She will step down as Secretary of State in 2013 or at the latest in 2014.

Losing to Obama has worked out unbelievably well for her.
 
By 2016 I think Mark Warner would beat Hillary. He was very popular as Governor, even with Pubs. I'd like to see a Warner - Christie matchup.
 
Cuomo is going to be tough. Has Wall Street in his backyard. Helped get New York to pass gay marriage. Governed a tough state to govern.

Warner has a lot of experience. Did incredible as a governor, has been elected senator, obviously has been seen as the future of the party due to his keynote speaker, also has been super successful in business. He's not a slouch.

Hillary's positives are well documented, but her age and the inconclusiveness of foreign policy decisions at this time are big questions. Also, I don't want to think this way, but what if something were to happen to Bill? It'd be hard.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top