The GOP's weak 2012 front-runner

[rightwinger]

Errrr, have you seen Obama's poll numbers lately? Why am I saying lately? Let me rephrase that. Have you seen his numbers EVER?

The numbers are lower than Nixon's in a third of the time it took Nixon to get there!

His poll numbers have been stable in the 45%-49% range for a year now. Reagans were in the low 40s at this time of his presidency. You obviously know nothing about Nixon

I still see you are unable to name a single Republican capable of winning. Do you even know of any top Republicans? Most Americans couldn't name anyone other than Palin

I don't know what polls you are looking at. Gallup has a different take!

You want me to name someone. O.K. Any run of the mill republican ham sandwich could beat this guy. BTW, I already said ANY of the republicans are in good position. What is it about the word ANY that you can't comprehend?

Do you even know any Republicans?

Most Americans don't

 

[rightwinger]

Errrr, have you seen Obama's poll numbers lately? Why am I saying lately? Let me rephrase that. Have you seen his numbers EVER?

The numbers are lower than Nixon's in a third of the time it took Nixon to get there!

His poll numbers have been stable in the 45%-49% range for a year now. Reagans were in the low 40s at this time of his presidency. You obviously know nothing about Nixon

I still see you are unable to name a single Republican capable of winning. Do you even know of any top Republicans? Most Americans couldn't name anyone other than Palin

I don't know what polls you are looking at. Gallup has a different take!

You want me to name someone. O.K. Any run of the mill republican ham sandwich could beat this guy. BTW, I already said ANY of the republicans are in good position. What is it about the word ANY that you can't comprehend?

Todays Gallup Poll has Obama at 46%

Do you even know how to read or do you just make up facts as you go along?

 

[Samson]

His poll numbers have been stable in the 45%-49% range for a year now. Reagans were in the low 40s at this time of his presidency. You obviously know nothing about Nixon

I still see you are unable to name a single Republican capable of winning. Do you even know of any top Republicans? Most Americans couldn't name anyone other than Palin

I don't know what polls you are looking at. Gallup has a different take!

You want me to name someone. O.K. Any run of the mill republican ham sandwich could beat this guy. BTW, I already said ANY of the republicans are in good position. What is it about the word ANY that you can't comprehend?

Do you even know any Republicans?

Most Americans don't

To be perfectly honest, I'd really rather not know any R candidates. They all, every last one, seem to be insurmountably boring.

 

[Vanbasten]

His poll numbers have been stable in the 45%-49% range for a year now. Reagans were in the low 40s at this time of his presidency. You obviously know nothing about Nixon

I still see you are unable to name a single Republican capable of winning. Do you even know of any top Republicans? Most Americans couldn't name anyone other than Palin

I don't know what polls you are looking at. Gallup has a different take!

You want me to name someone. O.K. Any run of the mill republican ham sandwich could beat this guy. BTW, I already said ANY of the republicans are in good position. What is it about the word ANY that you can't comprehend?

Todays Gallup Poll has Obama at 46%

Do you even know how to read or do you just make up facts as you go along?

Oh please. You don't delve very deep do you?

Gallup on August 10, 2010 noted that Republicans had the highest lead this year on the generic congressional ballot. Gallup missed a huge story: the Republican lead on the generic ballot was the largest in the lifetime of most Americans. To its credit, Gallup on August 30, 2010 noted in this poll that the Republican lead on the generic congressional ballot was the greatest in the history of Gallup polling, going back to 1942: "GOP Takes Unprecedented Lead on Generic Ballot." What Gallup neglected to mention is that while the ten-point lead in the poll released August 30 was the largest ever, the seven-point lead on August 10 was also, at that time, the largest lead ever.

Gallup, again, has missed a big story. On September 23, 2010, Gallup issued a report with the rather innocuous title of "Americans Trust U.S. More On Foreign Than On Domestic Affairs." This is vaguely interesting, but hardly startling. But look more closely at the Gallup graph, and something more interesting appears: our trust in government to handle domestic affairs appears to have dipped to a thirteen-year low in the latest poll. A perusal of older Gallup Polls show something very interesting: On September 18, 2008, Gallup measured the confidence that the American people had in government since before 1973. In the category of confidence in federal government to handle domestic affairs, the numbers Gallup shows in that poll are lower than at any level since Gallup shows online archival data, which means since at least 1972.

That means during Watergate, the Energy Crisis of 1973, and the recession of the same period, Americans had more confidence in Richard Nixon to handle domestic affairs than Americans have today in Barack Obama to handle domestic affairs. The calamitous years of 1973 to 1974, when there were lines to get gasoline (which was suddenly sky-high in price), when an American president resigned (preceded by an American vice president resigning), and when the nation dropped into a real economic downturn, surely have to rank as the nadir of confidence in government to handle domestic affairs. During those years, American had a viciously divided government, with partisan Democrats, who controlled both houses of Congress, doing everything possible to create suspicion and rancor towards the Nixon administration.

 

[KMAN]

Over the past year, the political world has operated under the assumption that Mitt Romney is the front-runner for the GOP presidential nomination in 2012. After all, he has a wide fundraising network and a deep roster of potential campaign talent. What’s more, Republicans almost always nominate their runner-up from the previous cycle (though both Mike Huckabee and Sarah Palin might also claim that status). But if Romney is the front-runner, he’s starting out at a much weaker position than Bob Dole or John McCain ever did at this point in the ’96 and ’08 cycles. According to our latest NBC/WSJ poll, Romney’s national fav/unfav is upside down at 21%-30%, compared with Dole’s net-positive 38%-25% in Sept. ’94 and McCain’s 40%-16% in June ’06. Intensity is a problem, too, for Romney. Just 6% view him VERY positively, versus 14% for Dole in ’94 and 11% for McCain in ’06.

First Read - First thoughts: The GOP's weak 2012 front-runner

If not Romney, who? Obviously not Palin, not Gingrich.

I didn't realize msnbc could still afford to run a website.... Anyways, big surprise msnbc calls GOP front runner weak....

Yank, is this the best topic you can find????? Why don't you try to find something good Obama has done to talk about????? Oops.... he hasn't done anything good... that's right....

 

[007]

First Read - First thoughts: The GOP's weak 2012 front-runner

If not Romney, who? Obviously not Palin, not Gingrich.

Rand Paul.

Now let's have it yank. I know you're just dying to throw out some TEA BAGGER...

 

[rightwinger]

I don't know what polls you are looking at. Gallup has a different take!

You want me to name someone. O.K. Any run of the mill republican ham sandwich could beat this guy. BTW, I already said ANY of the republicans are in good position. What is it about the word ANY that you can't comprehend?

Todays Gallup Poll has Obama at 46%

Do you even know how to read or do you just make up facts as you go along?

Oh please. You don't delve very deep do you?

Gallup on August 10, 2010 noted that Republicans had the highest lead this year on the generic congressional ballot. Gallup missed a huge story: the Republican lead on the generic ballot was the largest in the lifetime of most Americans. To its credit, Gallup on August 30, 2010 noted in this poll that the Republican lead on the generic congressional ballot was the greatest in the history of Gallup polling, going back to 1942: "GOP Takes Unprecedented Lead on Generic Ballot." What Gallup neglected to mention is that while the ten-point lead in the poll released August 30 was the largest ever, the seven-point lead on August 10 was also, at that time, the largest lead ever.

Gallup, again, has missed a big story. On September 23, 2010, Gallup issued a report with the rather innocuous title of "Americans Trust U.S. More On Foreign Than On Domestic Affairs." This is vaguely interesting, but hardly startling. But look more closely at the Gallup graph, and something more interesting appears: our trust in government to handle domestic affairs appears to have dipped to a thirteen-year low in the latest poll. A perusal of older Gallup Polls show something very interesting: On September 18, 2008, Gallup measured the confidence that the American people had in government since before 1973. In the category of confidence in federal government to handle domestic affairs, the numbers Gallup shows in that poll are lower than at any level since Gallup shows online archival data, which means since at least 1972.

That means during Watergate, the Energy Crisis of 1973, and the recession of the same period, Americans had more confidence in Richard Nixon to handle domestic affairs than Americans have today in Barack Obama to handle domestic affairs. The calamitous years of 1973 to 1974, when there were lines to get gasoline (which was suddenly sky-high in price), when an American president resigned (preceded by an American vice president resigning), and when the nation dropped into a real economic downturn, surely have to rank as the nadir of confidence in government to handle domestic affairs. During those years, American had a viciously divided government, with partisan Democrats, who controlled both houses of Congress, doing everything possible to create suspicion and rancor towards the Nixon administration.

Do you even bother to read the nonsense you post?

Generic polls are worthless and that gap you talked about in August is gone
A poll on govt trust in general has little to do with Obama if he still has a 46% favorable rating

Nixon? Obama has much higher numbers than Nixon did after Watergate. He also has higher numbers than Reagan at this point

 

[Vanbasten]

Todays Gallup Poll has Obama at 46%

Do you even know how to read or do you just make up facts as you go along?

Oh please. You don't delve very deep do you?

Gallup on August 10, 2010 noted that Republicans had the highest lead this year on the generic congressional ballot. Gallup missed a huge story: the Republican lead on the generic ballot was the largest in the lifetime of most Americans. To its credit, Gallup on August 30, 2010 noted in this poll that the Republican lead on the generic congressional ballot was the greatest in the history of Gallup polling, going back to 1942: "GOP Takes Unprecedented Lead on Generic Ballot." What Gallup neglected to mention is that while the ten-point lead in the poll released August 30 was the largest ever, the seven-point lead on August 10 was also, at that time, the largest lead ever.

Gallup, again, has missed a big story. On September 23, 2010, Gallup issued a report with the rather innocuous title of "Americans Trust U.S. More On Foreign Than On Domestic Affairs." This is vaguely interesting, but hardly startling. But look more closely at the Gallup graph, and something more interesting appears: our trust in government to handle domestic affairs appears to have dipped to a thirteen-year low in the latest poll. A perusal of older Gallup Polls show something very interesting: On September 18, 2008, Gallup measured the confidence that the American people had in government since before 1973. In the category of confidence in federal government to handle domestic affairs, the numbers Gallup shows in that poll are lower than at any level since Gallup shows online archival data, which means since at least 1972.

That means during Watergate, the Energy Crisis of 1973, and the recession of the same period, Americans had more confidence in Richard Nixon to handle domestic affairs than Americans have today in Barack Obama to handle domestic affairs. The calamitous years of 1973 to 1974, when there were lines to get gasoline (which was suddenly sky-high in price), when an American president resigned (preceded by an American vice president resigning), and when the nation dropped into a real economic downturn, surely have to rank as the nadir of confidence in government to handle domestic affairs. During those years, American had a viciously divided government, with partisan Democrats, who controlled both houses of Congress, doing everything possible to create suspicion and rancor towards the Nixon administration.

Do you even bother to read the nonsense you post?

Generic polls are worthless and that gap you talked about in August is gone
A poll on govt trust in general has little to do with Obama if he still has a 46% favorable rating

Nixon? Obama has much higher numbers than Nixon did after Watergate. He also has higher numbers than Reagan at this point

Yeah, because the american people are going to vote for a man that they have no confidence in.....ever heard of a vote of 'no confidence'? LOL!

Now, if he wants to try and win American Idol I'm sure that 'favorable rating' will come in quite handy. Even then, it might have to increase considerably!

 

[rightwinger]

Oh please. You don't delve very deep do you?

Gallup on August 10, 2010 noted that Republicans had the highest lead this year on the generic congressional ballot. Gallup missed a huge story: the Republican lead on the generic ballot was the largest in the lifetime of most Americans. To its credit, Gallup on August 30, 2010 noted in this poll that the Republican lead on the generic congressional ballot was the greatest in the history of Gallup polling, going back to 1942: "GOP Takes Unprecedented Lead on Generic Ballot." What Gallup neglected to mention is that while the ten-point lead in the poll released August 30 was the largest ever, the seven-point lead on August 10 was also, at that time, the largest lead ever.

Gallup, again, has missed a big story. On September 23, 2010, Gallup issued a report with the rather innocuous title of "Americans Trust U.S. More On Foreign Than On Domestic Affairs." This is vaguely interesting, but hardly startling. But look more closely at the Gallup graph, and something more interesting appears: our trust in government to handle domestic affairs appears to have dipped to a thirteen-year low in the latest poll. A perusal of older Gallup Polls show something very interesting: On September 18, 2008, Gallup measured the confidence that the American people had in government since before 1973. In the category of confidence in federal government to handle domestic affairs, the numbers Gallup shows in that poll are lower than at any level since Gallup shows online archival data, which means since at least 1972.

That means during Watergate, the Energy Crisis of 1973, and the recession of the same period, Americans had more confidence in Richard Nixon to handle domestic affairs than Americans have today in Barack Obama to handle domestic affairs. The calamitous years of 1973 to 1974, when there were lines to get gasoline (which was suddenly sky-high in price), when an American president resigned (preceded by an American vice president resigning), and when the nation dropped into a real economic downturn, surely have to rank as the nadir of confidence in government to handle domestic affairs. During those years, American had a viciously divided government, with partisan Democrats, who controlled both houses of Congress, doing everything possible to create suspicion and rancor towards the Nixon administration.

Do you even bother to read the nonsense you post?

Generic polls are worthless and that gap you talked about in August is gone
A poll on govt trust in general has little to do with Obama if he still has a 46% favorable rating

Nixon? Obama has much higher numbers than Nixon did after Watergate. He also has higher numbers than Reagan at this point

Yeah, because the american people are going to vote for a man that they have no confidence in.....ever heard of a vote of 'no confidence'? LOL!

Now, if he wants to try and win American Idol I'm sure that 'favorable rating' will come in quite handy. Even then, it might have to increase considerably!

I see you still can't come up with a single Republican that you claim could beat Obama. Obama has a 46% approval rating. Can you name a Republican who has a higher approval rating than 46% ???

Can you name any Republican?

 

[Dr.House]

Do you even bother to read the nonsense you post?

Generic polls are worthless and that gap you talked about in August is gone
A poll on govt trust in general has little to do with Obama if he still has a 46% favorable rating

Nixon? Obama has much higher numbers than Nixon did after Watergate. He also has higher numbers than Reagan at this point

Yeah, because the american people are going to vote for a man that they have no confidence in.....ever heard of a vote of 'no confidence'? LOL!

Now, if he wants to try and win American Idol I'm sure that 'favorable rating' will come in quite handy. Even then, it might have to increase considerably!

I see you still can't come up with a single Republican that you claim could beat Obama. Obama has a 46% approval rating. Can you name a Republican who has a higher approval rating than 46% ???

Can you name any Republican?

If this were a Republican it could beat Barry today:

 

[rightwinger]

Yeah, because the american people are going to vote for a man that they have no confidence in.....ever heard of a vote of 'no confidence'? LOL!

Now, if he wants to try and win American Idol I'm sure that 'favorable rating' will come in quite handy. Even then, it might have to increase considerably!

I see you still can't come up with a single Republican that you claim could beat Obama. Obama has a 46% approval rating. Can you name a Republican who has a higher approval rating than 46% ???

Can you name any Republican?

If this were a Republican it could beat Barry today:

Yea...thats a funny joke!
A fern could beat Obama


What is really funny is that the Republicans think they could win an election against Obama without a viable candidate. The very fact that in this entire thread, the right can't name a single candidate that they give a shit about.

Lookin bad for the GOP

 

[JakeStarkey]

Anyone who wants to know what mainstream Republicanism is thinking needs not to listen to the wacks to the far right. They are not mainstream.

 

[rightwinger]

Hey House!

How are those "Ferns" like Paladino, O'Donnell, Angle and Whitman doing?


Those are the "Ferns" that the Tea Baggers will stick the GOP with in 2012

 

[Rinata]

Over the past year, the political world has operated under the assumption that Mitt Romney is the front-runner for the GOP presidential nomination in 2012. After all, he has a wide fundraising network and a deep roster of potential campaign talent. What’s more, Republicans almost always nominate their runner-up from the previous cycle (though both Mike Huckabee and Sarah Palin might also claim that status). But if Romney is the front-runner, he’s starting out at a much weaker position than Bob Dole or John McCain ever did at this point in the ’96 and ’08 cycles. According to our latest NBC/WSJ poll, Romney’s national fav/unfav is upside down at 21%-30%, compared with Dole’s net-positive 38%-25% in Sept. ’94 and McCain’s 40%-16% in June ’06. Intensity is a problem, too, for Romney. Just 6% view him VERY positively, versus 14% for Dole in ’94 and 11% for McCain in ’06.

First Read - First thoughts: The GOP's weak 2012 front-runner

If not Romney, who? Obviously not Palin, not Gingrich.

This part of the article was interesting, I thought:

"NBC/WSJ poll shows that Romney begins the 2012 GOP presidential race in a weaker position than Bob Dole or John McCain ever did."

That's pitiful!!!

 

[Vanbasten]

What is really funny is that the Republicans think they could win an election against Obama without a viable candidate.

Lookin bad for the GOP

How is that funny? Obama had no experience doing anything, yet that didn't stop you morons from making him viable and winning. The guy couldn't run a lemonade stand, but he was viable, huh?

 

[Charles_Main]

I see you still can't come up with a single Republican that you claim could beat Obama. Obama has a 46% approval rating. Can you name a Republican who has a higher approval rating than 46% ???

Can you name any Republican?

If this were a Republican it could beat Barry today:

Yea...thats a funny joke!
A fern could beat Obama


What is really funny is that the Republicans think they could win an election against Obama without a viable candidate. The very fact that in this entire thread, the right can't name a single candidate that they give a shit about.

Lookin bad for the GOP

The Election is a long way off yet bud. Most people are focused on the Mid terms at this point

 

[JakeStarkey]

On this I think Charles Main has the right of it: a long way off.

The major issue, barring a successful jihadist strike here, will be the economy. If a recovery is solidly in place in 16 months, the Dems will brew class warfare, threatening the GOP wants to sacrifice all Dem babies in the fiery furnaces of the great god Gold.

If the economy is weak and the GOP has (as I have been saying for a year now) a reasonable candidate with a solid program presented in a calm yet engaging campaign, the GOP can win.

 

[rightwinger]

What is really funny is that the Republicans think they could win an election against Obama without a viable candidate.

Lookin bad for the GOP

How is that funny? Obama had no experience doing anything, yet that didn't stop you morons from making him viable and winning. The guy couldn't run a lemonade stand, but he was viable, huh?

Obama was building momentum after the 2004 convention. He was a known up and comer for the Democratic Party. The Dems also had Hillary and John Edwards (who imploded) as strong candidates.

Who is the only Republican that has anyone who cares? Sarah Palin
Her negative vote tally would outweigh the 25% who support her

2012 is no longer the distant future and the GOP is still lacking a viable candidate

 

[Dr.House]

I see you still can't come up with a single Republican that you claim could beat Obama. Obama has a 46% approval rating. Can you name a Republican who has a higher approval rating than 46% ???

Can you name any Republican?

If this were a Republican it could beat Barry today:

Yea...thats a funny joke!
A fern could beat Obama


What is really funny is that the Republicans think they could win an election against Obama without a viable candidate. The very fact that in this entire thread, the right can't name a single candidate that they give a shit about.

Lookin bad for the GOP

A fake fern at that....

I'm not a Republican... They have a while to pick their choice and I doubt the opinions of the far leftists such as yourself and Jokey really matter to them...

You're just going to do the usual straight D ticket... You should think about maybe switching out 0bama for a viable candidate yourself...

 

[rightwinger]

If this were a Republican it could beat Barry today:

Yea...thats a funny joke!
A fern could beat Obama


What is really funny is that the Republicans think they could win an election against Obama without a viable candidate. The very fact that in this entire thread, the right can't name a single candidate that they give a shit about.

Lookin bad for the GOP

A fake fern at that....

I'm not a Republican... They have a while to pick their choice and I doubt the opinions of the far leftists such as yourself and Jokey really matter to them...

You're just going to do the usual straight D ticket... You should think about maybe switching out 0bama for a viable candidate yourself...

I am a registered Republican and have never voted a straight ticket in my life