• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Rasmussen: Gingrich 45%, Obama 43%

Erod

Erod

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 28, 2008
Messages
15,483
Reaction score
8,227
Location
North Texas
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
2012 Presidential Matchups - Rasmussen Reports™

The Newt Gingrich surge has moved him to the top of the polls in Iowa, big gains in New Hampshire and now a two-point edge over President Obama in a hypothetical general election match-up.A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of Likely Voters finds Gingrich attracting 45% of the vote while President Obama earns support from 43%. Six percent (6%) prefer some other candidate, and six percent (6%) are undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
Click to expand...

Momentum seems to be building for Gingrich. He rallies the base, while Romney rallies the independents.

Just a two-horse GOP race now.
 
I saw the lead on Drudge and immediately said to myself _ Rasmussen_ and then clicked on it and behold - RASMUSSEN. Like Gomer Pyle used to say on TV "surprise surprise".

Actually this is excellent news that I welcome. I hope it convinces every singe Republican to reject Mitt Romney and embrace Newt as their 2012 standard bearer.
 
Please, don't throw me into the brier patch. ;)
 
haymarket said:
I saw the lead on Drudge and immediately said to myself _ Rasmussen_ and then clicked on it and behold - RASMUSSEN. Like Gomer Pyle used to say on TV "surprise surprise".

Actually this is excellent news that I welcome. I hope it convinces every singe Republican to reject Mitt Romney and embrace Newt as their 2012 standard bearer.
Click to expand...

Right now, the Republicans could probably beat your absent professional golfer with a rented mule and bag of funyuns.
 
I would be willing to be everything I own that Newt Gingrich will not be president of the United States... ever. At least not in this universe.
 
whysoserious said:
I would be willing to be everything I own that Newt Gingrich will not be president of the United States... ever. At least not in this universe.
Click to expand...

I doubt he gets past Mitt Romney, but if he does, he'll make Obama look like a schoolboy in a debate. It'll be like watching Green Bay play your local high school.
 
Erod said:
I doubt he gets past Mitt Romney, but if he does, he'll make Obama look like a schoolboy in a debate. It'll be like watching Green Bay play your local high school.
Click to expand...

We'll have to agree to disagree on that.
 
Erod said:
Right now, the Republicans could probably beat your absent professional golfer with a rented mule and bag of funyuns.
Click to expand...

That's not a nice thing to call Michele Bachmann.
 
Erod said:
I doubt he gets past Mitt Romney, but if he does, he'll make Obama look like a schoolboy in a debate. It'll be like watching Green Bay play your local high school.
Click to expand...
Gingrich's "Fox analyst" knowledge would get him in trouble very fast.
 
I STRONGLY support Gingrich for the GOP nomination and urge all Republicans to do the same. Don't be stuck with a candidate like Romney that you don't like....vote for someone who shares your values and your ideals.....Newt is your man!
 
Erod said:
Right now, the Republicans could probably beat your absent professional golfer with a rented mule and bag of funyuns.
Click to expand...

You're right, all is lost for Obama. Woe is me. It's such a shoo-in that you may as well nominate a conservative true believer like Michele Bachmann. :lol:
 
I am very close to concluding that its a done deal for Newt.

Look at it in the same terms of the 2008 Dem nomination. Hillary, who voted for the Iraq invasion, was never going to be the nominee in that environment. Same thing for Mitt. The creater of the Son of Obamacare was never going to be the nominee in this environment.

I think the only thing thats up in the air right now is if Romney can hang on in NH. If not, Newt will sweep the first four primaries easily and then cruise to the nomination.
 
Erod said:
I doubt he gets past Mitt Romney, but if he does, he'll make Obama look like a schoolboy in a debate. It'll be like watching Green Bay play your local high school.
Click to expand...

Which is all the more reason for you folks to nominate him next summer. Go for it. What was the Clint Eastwood line about do you feel lucky? ;)
 
Erod said:
Right now, the Republicans could probably beat your absent professional golfer with a rented mule and bag of funyuns.
Click to expand...

The saying "don't count your chickens before they're hatched" is pretty important I think and should not be ignored.

If you think Obama will be easily defeated OR you think he can easily win well then I'm afraid you've missed the ****ing point and should go back to school.
 
2004 was a good year model for using Rasmussen. 2008 was a horrible model for it. I think 2012 will be somewhat in between.

Rasmussen polls "likely voters" rather than "registered voters", which tends to skew naturally towards conservatives as they are statistically more likely to identify as such. In years where there's mild excitement for the Democratic nominee, these types of polls are useful because you're not seeing a lot of "unexpected" extra turnout happening for the Democrats. On the flip side, in cases like 2008, you have an excited liberal base that comes out as a surprise when compared to "normal" voters and gives you a bigger difference.

Excitement for Obama is significantly less than it was in 2008, but its not on life support similar to say Kerry in 2004. I'd say this Rasmussen poll is useful to get the overall portrait of the national standing but it needs to be taken as part of a large sum of various polls to get a clear view.

The ignorant thing to do would be to simply write it off becuase "Oh its Rasmussen". There's still plenty of information to gleam. For example, two weeks ago he was down...in Rasmussen's Poll....by 12 compared to Obama. Last week he was down 6%. So at the very least, using a consistant polling method, he's gained 12 points over the past 2 weeks. Regardless of the possible "slant" that Rasmussen's polling style may cause, that data...the increase...is still something that can give insight into the situation.
 
Last edited:
ZIRP4EVA said:
I am very close to concluding that its a done deal for Newt.

Look at it in the same terms of the 2008 Dem nomination. Hillary, who voted for the Iraq invasion, was never going to be the nominee in that environment. Same thing for Mitt. The creater of the Son of Obamacare was never going to be the nominee in this environment.

I think the only thing thats up in the air right now is if Romney can hang on in NH. If not, Newt will sweep the first four primaries easily and then cruise to the nomination.
Click to expand...
I think newt will win but he wont sweep the 1st four. I think NH will vote for their fellow new englander.
 
Zyphlin said:
Excitement for Obama is significantly less than it was in 2008, but its not on life support similar to say Kerry in 2004.
Click to expand...

I disagree. Kerry rode the anti-war wave and it nearly took him to the WH. With Obama ver 2012, theres nothing like that. The core base is utterly demoralized. And lets face it, thats a group that works best out of power. Its much easier for them to criticize whats going on than having to defend their utopian dreams as they are crashing down around them.
 
ZIRP4EVA said:
I disagree. Kerry rode the anti-war wave and it nearly took him to the WH.
Click to expand...

Excitement for a candidate and displeasure for the other sides candidate are two seperate htings. The anti-war wave was far more concentrated in the dislike for George Bush rather than the like and appeal of John Kerry.

With Obama ver 2012, theres nothing like that. The core base is utterly demoralized. And lets face it, thats a group that works best out of power. Its much easier for them to criticize whats going on than having to defend their utopian dreams as they are crashing down around them.
Click to expand...

The "Core Base" isn't what I'm talking about though; those are the type of Democrats that are your likely voters. I'm talking about the large majority that care little about politics outside of the election season and are swept up more in the rhetoric and pop culture appeal of the election than hard and fast issues. Obama's popularity, pop culture icon status, and the general fervor around him has definitely decreased significantly...but its still at a pretty solid point I think to still drive people out to vote who normally wouldn't bother.
 
Jetboogieman said:
The saying "don't count your chickens before they're hatched" is pretty important I think and should not be ignored.

If you think Obama will be easily defeated OR you think he can easily win well then I'm afraid you've missed the ****ing point and should go back to school.
Click to expand...

This country voted in a man who's biggest career negotiation was on his house with Tony Rezko. I take nothing for granted with our idiot citizenry. Think about it: Obama spent his entire time as a state senator running for Congress, and his entire time as a member of the Senate running for president, and we STILL elected him.

I hope Newt gets the nod simply for the theater of watching pull the Lincoln-Douglass tactics he vowed to take if Obama doesn't agree to his request for a series of debates.

If Obama won't agree to the debates, which he wants unmoderated like Lincoln-Douglass, Newt said he is going to follow Obama around the country during the campaign and speak in the same cities four hours after Obama. He said he'd do it until election day if he had to.

Gingrich would obliterate Obama in a debate. He would defeat anyone in the GOP, too, especially if the debate questions required any depth to their responses.

Just not sure he'll get the chance.
 
Last edited:
Erod said:
Gingrich would obliterate Obama in a debate. He would defeat anyone in the GOP, too, especially if the debate questions required any depth to their responses.
Click to expand...
You seem to think that Obama is a terrible debator. He did great against McCain, and McCain is someone who has run for president before and has had decades in the senate and politics in general to gain the knowledge needed to do well in a debate, yet Obama did very well.

As for you touting this one poll that shows Gingrich in the lead, if the day before the election Rasmussen showed Gingrich ahead by two I would expect Obama to win by 5. That's how they work. In terms of polling they are a joke. Averages are a much more accurate way to determine where everyone stands.

RealClearPolitics - Election 2012 - General Election: Gingrich vs. Obama
 
Zyphlin said:
2004 was a good year model for using Rasmussen. 2008 was a horrible model for it. I think 2012 will be somewhat in between.

Rasmussen polls "likely voters" rather than "registered voters", which tends to skew naturally towards conservatives as they are statistically more likely to identify as such. In years where there's mild excitement for the Democratic nominee, these types of polls are useful because you're not seeing a lot of "unexpected" extra turnout happening for the Democrats. On the flip side, in cases like 2008, you have an excited liberal base that comes out as a surprise when compared to "normal" voters and gives you a bigger difference.
Click to expand...

This sort of hits at one of the problems with Rasmussen. He only uses lan lines when calling people and currently only older people, which tend to be more conservative, own lan lines. So, he is missing a large segment of the population by not also using cell phone numbers. That is why I use RCP more than any indiviual polling site, aside from Nate Silver, because you get a more accurate picture.
 
Erod said:
This country voted in a man who's biggest career negotiation was on his house with Tony Rezko. I take nothing for granted with our idiot citizenry. Think about it: Obama spent his entire time as a state senator running for Congress, and his entire time as a member of the Senate running for president, and we STILL elected him.

I hope Newt gets the nod simply for the theater of watching pull the Lincoln-Douglass tactics he vowed to take if Obama doesn't agree to his request for a series of debates.

If Obama won't agree to the debates, which he wants unmoderated like Lincoln-Douglass, Newt said he is going to follow Obama around the country during the campaign and speak in the same cities four hours after Obama. He said he'd do it until election day if he had to.

Gingrich would obliterate Obama in a debate. He would defeat anyone in the GOP, too, especially if the debate questions required any depth to their responses.

Just not sure he'll get the chance.
Click to expand...

If that were true....why isn't Newt wowing everyone in the debates right now? LOL.....
 
soccerboy22 said:
This sort of hits at one of the problems with Rasmussen. He only uses lan lines when calling people and currently only older people, which tend to be more conservative, own lan lines. So, he is missing a large segment of the population by not also using cell phone numbers. That is why I use RCP more than any indiviual polling site, aside from Nate Silver, because you get a more accurate picture.
Click to expand...
Not to mention they use robocalls, which have a very large turn-down rate, and do all of their polling in one night over the course of a four hour period as opposed to doing it over the course of an entire day or over the course of two days which is what is considered the norm.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom