Gingrich Maintains 6 Point Lead in S.C.

[Douger]

Gingrich maintains 6 point lead - Public Policy Polling

January 19, 2012
Gingrich maintains 6 point lead

Thursday may have been one of the most eventful days of the Republican campaign so far, but the state of the race in South Carolina didn't change much. Newt Gingrich continues to lead Mitt Romney by 6 points, 35-29, with Ron Paul and Rick Santorum each tied for third at 15%.

Revelations from the Marianne Gingrich interview haven't taken a toll on Newt's image yet. For the first time in our South Carolina tracking this month his favorability is better than Romney's, with 53% of voters holding a positive opinion of him compared to 51% for his chief competitor.

Gingrich's lead with evangelicals held steady today at 40-22 over Romney. He's also doing well with Tea Party voters (46-21), registered Republicans (38-30), voters describing themselves as very conservative (41-21), men (39-27), and voters in the Upstate (36-25).

Romney is leading with non-evangelicals (39-30), independents (30-26), moderates (44-23), and women (32-31). The problem for him is that all of those groups are a minority within the South Carolina Republican electorate.

Both Gingrich (81%) and Romney (79%) have supporters who are pretty firmly committed to them. 81% of Paul's supporters say they'll definitely vote for him as well. Santorum has the voters most likely to abandon him for one of the more viable contenders in the final 36 hours, with 32% of them saying they could end up voting for someone else. Gingrich is the second choice of 45% of Santorum voters open to changing their minds, compared to 22% for Romney.

Things look good for Newt. He has the lead, his support seems to have more room to grow than Romney's, and so far he's not seeing any ill effects from his ex-wife going to the media. It's important to note though that many average South Carolina voters- the non-political junkies- will get their first exposure to the Marianne Gingrich story in the morning paper or on the news sometime tomorrow. That may or may not end up having a big impact on his numbers. But it's important to keep in mind.

Methodological note: Rick Perry, who dropped out, and Buddy Roemer, who's not on the ballot in South Carolina, were both included as response options for the Wednesday interviews of this poll. They were not included in Thursday's interviews, and we reallocated respondents who chose them on Wednesday night to their second choices.

And SC has more houses on wheels than any other state in the mpyre.
What's your point ?

 

[eots]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83PgJMdMF0E]A Bullfrog Takes on Newt - YouTube[/ame]

The parallels between Romney and Newt and the bullfrog and newt are uncanny

 

[JakeStarkey]

And for the ladies, well, you have Mittens whose whacky cult thinks that women only get into Heaven if bonded to a man... Yup, that'll go over in Stepford, Conneticutt, where I think the Romneys were assembled.

Consult the polls, not me. The numbers are against your man. The Republicans in Stepford will vote for Romney before Newt, and the dems hate Gingrich far more than Romney.

The numbers are solidly against you.

Snarky, the polls show Romney losing, too. If your argument is "go with the polls", then we should show all these jokers the door. Come on, the guy got BOOED last night in SC. and his poll numbers are collapsing as we find out about his dodgy business deals and bank account in the Caymans.

We are talking about the national election, and Newt has very little chance, considering all of his baggage, of getting a bit more than 40%. Obama will beat him handily.

That's what you want?

 

[JoeB131]

So You are really claiming a guy who belongs to a cult that says that dark skin is a curse from God and didn't let black folks become members until 1978 is going to win over all those non-white folk? One who demogouged the immigration issue while hiring them to do his yardwork?

And for the ladies, well, you have Mittens whose whacky cult thinks that women only get into Heaven if bonded to a man... Yup, that'll go over in Stepford, Conneticutt, where I think the Romneys were assembled.

Which candidate is putting that in their commercials?

Hint: none of them.

Do you really think that SC voters already know the weird details of Mormonism? I doubt it. I would bet that all they are taught is that it's a cult.

Nobody has to. Just like Obama never had to say, "Boy, Sarah Palin sure is stupid" in 2008.

The Media will do that dirty work for them. If Romney becomes the nominee, you can be assured the mainstream media will give us a crash course on how racist and crazy Mormons really are. Why do you think they've largely left Romney alone up to this point?

This is why the GOP has to stop letting the media pick our candidates.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Do you victims have to suggest that the "Mainstream Media" runs your life in EVERY FUCKING excuse-filled, defeatist, loser post?

 

[JoeB131]

1) Why should people stay in loveless marriages? I'm always curious about what religion says people should make each other miserable because an imaginary sky pixie says so.

One can divorce, but don't pretend to be more pious than the other guy after a couple of divorces and a bunch of extramarital affairs.

When does Newt do that. He's been pretty upfront about the fact he's made mistakes and caused people pain, and no one had to indict or impeach him to do it.

]

And that would be right out of Obama's playbook. This is unbelievable that such a thing is coming from the purported "right".

Why should it be a left/right thing? I look at it as right/wrong thing. I think most sensible people would think it's wrong for a rich guy to wreck your life to get a little more money. But that was pretty much what Romney did to people.

I'll bet a lot of Democrats wished they had listened to Al Gore in 1988 when he said that Dukakis' letting murderers out on weekend passes was a bad idea.

AmPad was a stationery manufacturer. When Mitt took it over it had less than $9 million in annual revenues. Five years later, it had $200 million in annual revenues.

Then along came the internet and the end of snail mail. People don't use stationery any more. They use email and online billing.

THAT is what killed the stationary industry. To survive, you had to go to economies of scale, like Staples.

So that's the slogan you want to run on? "We are going to get rid of your good paying Union job with benefits and replace it with a McJob at Staples, and you'd better learn to like it, Peasant".

For the record, AmPad had 11 million in debt when Bain took it over and 400 m illion in debt when they let it fall into bankruptcy, leaving the investors and banks holding the bag when they got rich. Had nothing to do with the "internet", it had to do with corrupt management. International Paper, Georgia Pacific, and other paper manufacturers all realized- guess what, we are still using a fuckload of paper despite being a "paperless" society. Even AmPad emerged from Bankruptcy, the few surviving employees probably happy they got Mitt Romney out of their lives.

Jesus. Are you some kind of marxist? Do think buggy whip makers should be kept employed forever?

See above. We aren't talking about Buggy whips. People still use paper.

"Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration. Capital has its rights, which are as worthy of protection as any other rights." - Abraham Lincoln 1861.

Man, what a fuckin socialist that guy was!

It sounds nice taken out of context, but I seriously doubt Lincoln would believe we should keep making stationery no one is using.

which wasn't the issue, as I have said. The issue was with not just AmPad but GS steel and KB Toys, was not that there was a lack of demand for their products, or even a need to adjust business plans. The problem was that Bain saw that it was easier to loot these companies for a quick buck than build them. Romney is like a doctor who found there was more money to be made in harvesting organs.

Again, I work on something for 10 hours. You are the investor. We make $10,000 Profit on that. How should that be divided, fairly?

Look, people are finally taking a good long look at Romney, and they see a guy who won't release his taxes, uses his wealth to hide his fortune, and says brilliant things like "I like to be able to fire people".

Did you really just use the "fire people" line out of context? People are still doing that? Holy shit!

He said he would like to be able to have a choice in what health insurance he buys. He wants to have a choice in selection and not be told by the government what he must buy and from whom. He likes a customer being able to "fire" a company that does not satisfy them.

THen that's what he SHOULD have said. Not "I like to fire people". It shows a lot of his thinking. "I have money and I can push people around."

Incidently, the comment in context is laughable. Most of us get health insurance through our employers. We'd never be able to get it individually at anywhere the same rate. This is just another clueless rich guy who has no idea how the "other half" (or in this case, the other 99%) live. The concept that we'd be able to "fire" our insurer when they don't pay for our cancer treatment and hire someone else is ludicrous. More than likely, we have what happened to me at my last job. When it came time to downsize, the first of us to go were the ones who had run up large medical bills in the last few years.

And you are still playing the class warfare card. What exactly is the problem you are having with Romney's taxes? Are you upset and want the rich to be taxed more?

I think it's kind of silly a millionaire is paying 15% when my tax burden from the Feds is close to 22% when you factor in Social Security and Medicare. More to the point, if Romney is so proud of his cleverness, why not do what every other major contender for the job- INCLUDING HIS FATHER - has done and do a complete disclosure?

Are you a Democrat? I need to be clear on this.

I'm a republican who loves America and doesn't think my party should be a tool of multi-national corporations and rich douchebags trying to turn us into a third world country. How about you?

Obama never would have gotten elected 30 years ago. But Capitalism isn't paying off for most folks anymore, and they are willing to take a header on this guy. The GOP has lost touch with working folks and what they really care about. They just take the big bags of money from Wall Street and do their bidding.

 

[JoeB131]

Do you victims have to suggest that the "Mainstream Media" runs your life in EVERY FUCKING excuse-filled, defeatist, loser post?

Not what I said at all, guy.

I merely pointed out that there is a bias in the MSM, and that they can create an image of a candidate without his opponent ever having to go there. Conversely, they can cover up obvious flaws or minimalize them.

I remember that for years, a lot of the MSM wouldn't even talk about Paula Jones lawsuit or what her allegations were. But, man, we heard about Sarah's fight with her brother in law five seconds after she got the nomination.

Incidently, not saying I think Palin was a good pick. She wasn't. McCain didn't do his homework.

I just point out that the GOP needs to look at the MSM as part of the landscape. They are going to do everything they can to help the Democrat. So this "Shhhhhhh... you can't talk about Romney's flaws now!" mantra I hear from the right is that you and your buddies will be saying WORSE things after he gets the nomination.

 

[ecinicola]

i see Newt is doing well in s.c. Actually I am glad. I like Newt's views and think he would do well for us if he won the election. I do know we can't afford another 4 yrs of this administration and thats pretty obvious.

 

[bripat9643]

We are talking about the national election, and Newt has very little chance, considering all of his baggage, of getting a bit more than 40%. Obama will beat him handily.

That's what you want?

It's obvious that you and the rest of the turds in this forum are terrified of Gingrich.

 

[bripat9643]

Do you victims have to suggest that the "Mainstream Media" runs your life in EVERY FUCKING excuse-filled, defeatist, loser post?

We understand who the enemy is.

 

[Synthaholic]

So You are really claiming a guy who belongs to a cult that says that dark skin is a curse from God and didn't let black folks become members until 1978 is going to win over all those non-white folk? One who demogouged the immigration issue while hiring them to do his yardwork?

And for the ladies, well, you have Mittens whose whacky cult thinks that women only get into Heaven if bonded to a man... Yup, that'll go over in Stepford, Conneticutt, where I think the Romneys were assembled.

Which candidate is putting that in their commercials?

Hint: none of them.

Do you really think that SC voters already know the weird details of Mormonism? I doubt it. I would bet that all they are taught is that it's a cult.

Nobody has to. Just like Obama never had to say, "Boy, Sarah Palin sure is stupid" in 2008.

The Media will do that dirty work for them. If Romney becomes the nominee, you can be assured the mainstream media will give us a crash course on how racist and crazy Mormons really are. Why do you think they've largely left Romney alone up to this point?

This is why the GOP has to stop letting the media pick our candidates.

This is such a bullshit talking point.

How is the media picking the candidate? Be specific now!

 

[Synthaholic]

Do you victims have to suggest that the "Mainstream Media" runs your life in EVERY FUCKING excuse-filled, defeatist, loser post?

Not what I said at all, guy.

I merely pointed out that there is a bias in the MSM, and that they can create an image of a candidate without his opponent ever having to go there. Conversely, they can cover up obvious flaws or minimalize them.

I remember that for years, a lot of the MSM wouldn't even talk about Paula Jones lawsuit or what her allegations were. But, man, we heard about Sarah's fight with her brother in law five seconds after she got the nomination.

Incidently, not saying I think Palin was a good pick. She wasn't. McCain didn't do his homework.

I just point out that the GOP needs to look at the MSM as part of the landscape. They are going to do everything they can to help the Democrat. So this "Shhhhhhh... you can't talk about Romney's flaws now!" mantra I hear from the right is that you and your buddies will be saying WORSE things after he gets the nomination.

More total bullshit from you.

 

[Synthaholic]

We are talking about the national election, and Newt has very little chance, considering all of his baggage, of getting a bit more than 40%. Obama will beat him handily.

That's what you want?

It's obvious that you and the rest of the turds in this forum are terrified of Gingrich.

 

[Synthaholic]

Do you victims have to suggest that the "Mainstream Media" runs your life in EVERY FUCKING excuse-filled, defeatist, loser post?

We understand who the enemy is.

Whats the matter? Can't figure out how to turn off your TV?


Dumbass.

 

[JoeB131]

Do you victims have to suggest that the "Mainstream Media" runs your life in EVERY FUCKING excuse-filled, defeatist, loser post?

Not what I said at all, guy.

I merely pointed out that there is a bias in the MSM, and that they can create an image of a candidate without his opponent ever having to go there. Conversely, they can cover up obvious flaws or minimalize them.

I remember that for years, a lot of the MSM wouldn't even talk about Paula Jones lawsuit or what her allegations were. But, man, we heard about Sarah's fight with her brother in law five seconds after she got the nomination.

Incidently, not saying I think Palin was a good pick. She wasn't. McCain didn't do his homework.

I just point out that the GOP needs to look at the MSM as part of the landscape. They are going to do everything they can to help the Democrat. So this "Shhhhhhh... you can't talk about Romney's flaws now!" mantra I hear from the right is that you and your buddies will be saying WORSE things after he gets the nomination.

More total bullshit from you.

I remember when Jones v. Clinton was about to be heard by the Supreme Court, and CBS 60 Minutes did a report on the legal aspects of a president being sued civilly, and they killed the audio when Jones detailed what Clinton did to her. Because they felt it was inappropriate to repeat the allegations (that all sensible people agree probably happened.)

 

[JimH52]

In 2008 South Carolina was where things went ... er ... south ... so to speak.

If they give us Newt this year, I'm taking them off my Christmas card list!

Oh, please. McCain was really the best the GOP could do in 2008.

Mittens sucked in 2008, he sucks now.

Weird religion. Slimy business practices. Money in the Caymans and "I like to fire people".

You really think this is the guy we ought to go with?

And that will be the reason that Newt takes the nomination. No one wants to vote for the Mormon.

GO NEWT!

 

[JoeB131]

In 2008 South Carolina was where things went ... er ... south ... so to speak.

If they give us Newt this year, I'm taking them off my Christmas card list!

Oh, please. McCain was really the best the GOP could do in 2008.

Mittens sucked in 2008, he sucks now.

Weird religion. Slimy business practices. Money in the Caymans and "I like to fire people".

You really think this is the guy we ought to go with?

And that will be the reason that Newt takes the nomination. No one wants to vote for the Mormon.

GO NEWT!

That should be the case.... but a think a lot of evangelicals hate blacks more than they hate Mormons.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Why do the far right want to destroy the Republican Party? The majority of it will walk away from those wacks in this coming election. The majority loves America too much to tolerate these clowns.

 

[JoeB131]

Why do the far right want to destroy the Republican Party? The majority of it will walk away from those wacks in this coming election. The majority loves America too much to tolerate these clowns.

I'm not sure who "the majority" you keep talking about is...

I mean, I keep waiting to see this flood of Romney Democrats you keep talking about, but they never seem to show up.

If Newt is the nominee, he'll probalby get about the same amount that McCain got, about 47%. Whether he can get that critical additional 3% or not will largely depend on the state of the economy and if people still have confidence in Obama.

Romney, on the other hand, will drive people out of the GOP. I know I'll be done with them for a few elections if he's the nominee.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Why do the far right want to destroy the Republican Party? The majority of it will walk away from those wacks in this coming election. The majority loves America too much to tolerate these clowns.

I'm not sure who "the majority" you keep talking about is...

I mean, I keep waiting to see this flood of Romney Democrats you keep talking about, but they never seem to show up.

If Newt is the nominee, he'll probalby get about the same amount that McCain got, about 47%. Whether he can get that critical additional 3% or not will largely depend on the state of the economy and if people still have confidence in Obama.

Romney, on the other hand, will drive people out of the GOP. I know I'll be done with them for a few elections if he's the nominee.

McCain received about 46% and Newt will poll several % points behind that.

With Romney the nominee, we can get minimize in the future the influence of the evangelicals and libertarian far right.