Rasmussen: Obama 46, Perry 39

posted at 8:06 pm on September 16, 2011 by Allahpundit

Two weeks ago, it was Perry 44, Obama 41. Today, this. What happened? Oh … right.

Although…

Perry trails Obama by 15 percentage points among women and barely leads among men. Perry trails among voters under 40, runs even among 40-somethings and leads among those 50 and older. It’s worth remembering that most voters over 40 voted against Obama in 2008.

Perry currently attracts just 71% of the Republican vote, while the president wins 85% of Democrats. Among voters not affiliated with either party, the race is a toss-up.

His numbers among Republicans will soar if he’s the nominee, as they would for any other candidate in the field, but I’m not sure what to make of the fact that he leads O among the over-50 crowd. Like Ras says, that’s to be expected given Obama’s track record in 2008, but maybe it’s also anecdotal evidence that Social Security isn’t hurting Perry as badly as we think. Could be his numbers are down simply because his overall performance at the debates has been lackluster, especially given the high expectations that accompanied his “big hoss”/white knight persona when he jumped in. In fact, Rasmussen’s crosstabs reveal that Perry leads Obama 49/38 among voters aged 65 or over. In 2008, McCain won that demographic 53/45. Perry’s outperforming him — for the moment.

Another data point from Gallup. Note the line on independents:

Worse than this, perhaps, is that pluralities of both Republicans (37 percent) and independents (40 percent) think Perry’s views on Social Security will hurt his election chances. That’s a potentially deadly liability, especially in a long primary race where electability may become more important the closer we get to the general campaign. If Romney and Perry are roughly even in delegates after two months and umpteen debates, undecideds may try to break the stalemate by looking to the most basic qualification of all — viability against Obama. And unless I’m missing something, there’s no obvious way for Perry to undo this perception that he’s less electable because of his Social Security views. Voters have heard for decades that it’s the “third rail of American politics”; they know Bush was routed when he tried to engage on privatization in 2005. Even if Perry comes up with his own reform plan — which may be in the works, as he’s now talking to Paul Ryan — the mere fact that this became a major issue early on may influence the public’s image of Perry going forward.

One more piece of bad news for Perryites:

The unemployment rate in Texas rose a bit in August to 8.5%, its highest rate since 1987.

That leaves the Lone Star State in the middle of the pack nationally, but it’s jobless rate remains below the national rate of 9.1%. The uptick, reported Friday by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, is worth noting since Texas Gov. Rick Perry has based his presidential campaign on his state’s ability to create jobs while much of the country is stuck in the economic doldrums.

Mr. Perry’s campaign blamed President Barack Obama. “Texas is not immune to the effects of the national recession,” Mr. Perry’s spokesman, Mark Miner, said in an email. “And even during this national economic downturn, which the president’s misguided policies have only worsened, Texas remains the nation’s top economy.”

That’s neat spin, but Texas’s economic record is the pillar holding his entire campaign up. If it starts to crack as the race wears on, his chances could collapse. Especially given the other electability concerns.

Late poll tonight, just out as I write this: Perry 23, Romney 16, Gingrich 7, Bachmann 7.

Update: Yet another liability: Did Perry support TARP?

The AP covered the letter [dated October 1, 2008 and co-signed by the RGA and DGA] with the headline, “Governors, Business Up Pressure for Bailout Bill.” It’s very hard to read otherwise.

“We strongly urge Congress to leave partisanship at the door and pass an economic recovery package,” they wrote. “It is time for Washington, D.C. to step up, be responsible, an do what’s in the best interest of American taxpayers and our economy.”

Perry, later that day, released a statement that seemed aimed at countering the impression left by his letter without clarifying what he was calling for: “[G]overnment should not be in the business of using taxpayer dollars to bail out corporate America. Congress needs to take off its partisan gloves and work together to bring both short and long term stability to the credit markets….”

Perry maintained in the 2010 primary that he hadn’t supported the bailout, something his spokesman Mark Miner reiterated to me today.

He opposed a “bail out” but publicly supported an “economic recovery package” on the day Congress passed TARP. Essentially, he punted.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5

Rasmussen: Obama 46, Perry 39
Sep 16, 2011 8:06 PM by Allahpundit
400 Comments »

[photo caption of Perry]

Decline.

Well then… hide the decline.

Problem solved.

Mcguyver on September 17, 2011 at 12:06 PM

The Republicans with Perry as its nominee will be destroyed by a conservative third party ticket. He’s a disaster in every way.

Buddahpundit on September 17, 2011 at 12:11 PM

…Texas’s economic record is the pillar holding his entire campaign up. If it starts to crack as the race wears on…

Or if the administration manages to sabotage it, EPA mandated rolling blackouts next August come to mind.

agmartin on September 17, 2011 at 12:33 PM

Like Ras says, that’s to be expected given Obama’s track record in 2008, but maybe it’s also anecdotal evidence that Social Security isn’t hurting Perry as badly as we think.

Maybe yes, maybe no..it will help him if he comes up with a reform plan of his own..and I don’t doubt that Republicans will overlook the fact that he folded like a cheap lawn chair on this issue.

CBS came out with a poll as well and while Perry does lead the pack in that poll at 23% the poll also said that most Republicans support both social security and medicare and that only one in three supports cuts in benefits. Apparently they do not consider the program to be unconstitutional.

Terrye on September 17, 2011 at 2:00 PM

I’m hoping Palin runs, so that she can split the Perry vote.

If Perry is the nominee, expect a third party run. Personally I’m tired of the South hijacking the Republican Party and the conservatism movement. Turning the GOP into a parochial Southern party does it no favors in the long run. Even blue blue states like Massachusetts have millions of conservatives (40%) and they are feeling mighty disenfranchised by this two-party system that doesn’t represent them.

haner on September 17, 2011 at 2:17 PM

haner on September 17, 2011 at 2:17 PM

Crazy on the Romney side, crazy on the Palin side, crazy on the Perry side…

Go Obama!

Schadenfreude on September 17, 2011 at 2:31 PM

why would Perry win seniors and lose juniors if this poll is a result of his stance on SS

doesn’t make sense

seniors should be scared and juniors should be happy

windansea on September 16, 2011 at 8:14 PM

Perry promised he won’t touch current seniors or those about to get SS.

That leaves those under 50 getting the ax. Makes perfect sense that those under 50 are scared. It’s not like they haven’t been paying into SS for 20-30 years already….

haner on September 17, 2011 at 5:28 PM

The Republicans with Perry as its nominee will be destroyed by a conservative third party ticket. He’s a disaster in every way.

Buddahpundit on September 17, 2011 at 12:11 PM

And what happens if Romney is the nominee? /sarc

TheRightMan on September 17, 2011 at 5:31 PM

haner on September 17, 2011 at 5:28 PM

Since you appear to be a Romney supporter, would you care to tell me the difference between the Perry approach and Romney approach to reforming Social Security?

TheRightMan on September 17, 2011 at 5:35 PM

Since you appear to be a Romney supporter, would you care to tell me the difference between the Perry approach and Romney approach to reforming Social Security?

TheRightMan on September 17, 2011 at 5:35 PM

I don’t know what Perry’s exact stance on SS is right now since he hasn’t articulated it in detail. I do know that he has wanted to return SS to the states and has defended this state-based idea during the debate. That is an idea I’m vehemently opposed to given that I live in a bankrupt blue state and could just imagine how my state would run a retirement program for all workers. It’s also a logistic nightmare given how people retire in different states etc (just look at out of state pension fraud among public employees).

Romney’s solution to reforming SS is pretty straightforward: raise the eligibility age gradually and perhaps add means testing along the way. This is a tweak to SS.

I disagree that SS is a Ponzi scheme, I believe it’s very clear that it is a transfer payment from the young to the elderly. I think given the minuscule amount that Americans save for their retirement and the fact that most children live far away from their parents in search of job opportunities, we need such a transfer payment from the young to the elderly. Given that our population is aging, then we need to adjust the benefits here and there to take into the fact that there are fewer workers per beneficiary. But do we need to completely dismantle SS and hand it to the states? I don’t think so.

haner on September 17, 2011 at 5:57 PM

That is an idea I’m vehemently opposed to given that I live in a bankrupt blue state and could just imagine how my state would run a retirement program for all workers.

…But do we need to completely dismantle SS and hand it to the states? I don’t think so.

haner on September 17, 2011 at 5:57 PM

I understand your fear, haner, but at this stage – Perry’s proposal to shift to a state-run model is just that! A proposal!

We are not in a dictatorship – it’s still a democratic country with the Executive, Legislature, and Judiciary.

Trust me – whatever model of social security reform that is proposed by a President Perry or Romney will have to obtain the support of Republicans, as well as a decent number of Democrats. Otherwise, it goes nowhere.

A President hasn’t got the power to unilaterally reform Social Security so there is nothing to fear.

Perry is bold – and that is what I like about him. I see him as one of those politicians who don’t mind their poll numbers taking a hit if it means doing the right thing. Romney strikes me as the type that will pander and will run off if the media writes mean things about him.

TheRightMan on September 17, 2011 at 6:21 PM

The Republicans with Perry as its nominee will be destroyed by a conservative third party ticket. He’s a disaster in every way.

Buddahpundit on September 17, 2011 at 12:11 PM

Good Luck with Mitt Rommey then – cuz that’s who you’ll get.

HondaV65 on September 17, 2011 at 8:45 PM

I disagree that SS is a Ponzi scheme, I believe it’s very clear that it is a transfer payment from the young to the elderly.

haner on September 17, 2011 at 5:57 PM

LOL – so it’s a Ponzi Scheme.

HondaV65 on September 17, 2011 at 8:46 PM

LMFAO – Why is everyone “afraid” that Rick Perry will end Social Security?

This is scaremongering to the worst degree.

George Bush OWNED both houses of Congress – and couldn’t even get Social Security PRIVATIZED.

What makes any FOOL believe that Rick Perry could actually END Social Security?

If that’s one of your fears do us a favor – please join the Democratic Party.

Please.

HondaV65 on September 17, 2011 at 8:51 PM

LOL – so it’s a Ponzi Scheme.

HondaV65 on September 17, 2011 at 8:46 PM

It’s like any other wealth distributing tax. Doesn’t make it a Ponzi scheme. It doesn’t promise outsized returns and there’s no investment value to it.

haner on September 17, 2011 at 10:03 PM

I can see that my fellow Americans don’t give a crap about the economy or the country if they are willing to vote for Obama again for whatever reason. Americans are total fools. Good luck with Obama and your hopes America. I’m going to go buy more silver and gold and figure out a way to hide my money from these liberal leaches. I’m not investing a penny in this country.

Dollayo on September 18, 2011 at 12:14 AM

Someone should question Perry the Perfect Host And His Open Arms

Social Security? Wait till the bills start coming in for the undocumented visitors as they start demanding all the benefits to catch up with everyone else. Building a fence and having intense patrols will make a lot of sense. Sending them back will look like a real bargain.

The cost has been estimated presently at $29 Billion.

http://www.personalliberty.com/conservative-politics/government/how-much-do-illegal-immigrants-really-cost-the-united-states/

There are indications that this figure is actually low.

IlikedAUH2O on September 18, 2011 at 2:00 AM

Guess it’s over.

jollybird on September 18, 2011 at 2:22 AM

of course, the weak willed conservatives bend to anything the MSM states about their candidate…I called that months ago.
Every front running candidate, until they get one like McCain, a wishy-washy RINO, they attack and the conservative nod their head like a bobble head doll on a Buick’s dashboard.

right2bright on September 18, 2011 at 7:58 AM

IlikedAUH2O on September 18, 2011 at 2:00 AM

And this is a perfect example…you do know that every candidate, announced and unannounced, has basically the same policies for immigration…virtually the same for SS…good grief, now easy to manipulate you guys…

right2bright on September 18, 2011 at 8:01 AM

The Republicans with Perry as its nominee will be destroyed by a conservative third party ticket. He’s a disaster in every way.

Buddahpundit on September 17, 2011 at 12:11 PM

Now either these guys are liberal plants…or they are just plain stupid…but their is a bunch of them who post with no, absolutely no valid links or arguments…some are supporting another candidate and will destroy Perry for them to win, and others are just trolls…either way, the effect will be the same, minimize the impact of conservatives…and push away the independents.
Fools, can’t debate without destroying…utterly fools…I am going to call it now…Obama will be our president again.

right2bright on September 18, 2011 at 8:04 AM

The jobless rate is not precisely a fair measure. Rather we should look at the NUMBER of jobs. The reason is that unlike international moves, inter*state* moves are easy. As Texas has weathered the recession so well, millions of people have flocked to the state, attracted by the creation of jobs. If you held the population constant, Texas’ unemployment rate would be *several* points lower.

SoRight on September 18, 2011 at 7:10 PM

Someone should question Perry the Perfect Host And His Open Arms

Social Security? Wait till the bills start coming in for the undocumented visitors as they start demanding all the benefits to catch up with everyone else. Building a fence and having intense patrols will make a lot of sense. Sending them back will look like a real bargain.

IlikedAUH2O on September 18, 2011 at 2:00 AM

In the last debate, Perry had a lame-jack explanation of supporting the Dream act – that if we don’t educated these non citizen students, they will end up on the dole. What does that say about these illegals? And if they do get educated, so that, in Perry’s state they are no longer on the dole, why should these educated non citizens be hired before our educated citizens?

I have tested a few non political types on this subject. If I explain the Dream act, and Perry’s debate explanation, the reaction is extremely negative.

entagor on September 19, 2011 at 1:39 AM

I like Perry… what is so bad about that… I like him on every issue BUT immigrantion. BUT hey… immigaration is worse under Obama. I am sooo sick of these Ron Paul bots saying they would rather see another term of Obama…. geez… as if that is the answer…

charmingtail on September 20, 2011 at 8:20 AM

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5