Hot Air Presidential Survey Results
posted at 8:45 am on November 2, 2011 by Patrick Ishmael
Two things worth noting, and then I’ll let the results speak for themselves. First, the top five candidates from the last survey are again the top five candidates in this survey, and in exactly the same order. Herman Cain again takes the top spot, followed by Rick Perry, Newt Gingrich, Mitt Romney and Ron Paul. Second, Cain is the first candidate to cross the 50% mark in a survey, at 50.97%. This includes surveys where Sarah Palin was included. In fact, the only candidate to come close to 50% was Perry, who hit 48.29% in September.
Questions? Comments? I’m here.
This post was promoted from GreenRoom to HotAir.com.
To see the comments on the original post, look here.
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: « Previous 1 2
You know, I can’t really take you very seriously when you call yourself a STRONG conservative at the same time you do nothing but shill for a wishywashy moderate like Romney. I just can’t. I’ve researched Romney’s positions. It takes a while, varying as they are, and I’ve seen the actual things he’s put into practice. I’m also aware that it was all the MA court’s fault!!!! Whatever…as my father says, “Anyone who can get elected in MA is not conservative enough for me.”
Now, you may truly believe he is the only one out there with a chance to beat Obama, but I truly believe you are wrong, and if you’re not, we are really doomed. I also truly believe he would only be slightly less bad for the nation than Obama, in the long run, if at all, and as a mother, I have to consider the long run. I also consider myself a very STRONG conservative. We will have to agree to disagree. Our votes can cancel each other’s out. ;)
pannw on November 2, 2011 at 11:12 AM
What happens when your frontrunner continues to get bashed by “fellow conservatives” thinking you are doing the party a favor by choosing the possibly not electable Cain backed by multiple poll results.
g2825m on November 2, 2011 at 11:13 AM
Very strong conservative my friend! and there are those of us that have been around for awhile that do support Romney.
If you did really look at his record and NOT what others quote about him which many are half-truths and distort his positions you would see that he is totally capable of turning around our CURRENT issues.
Let me ask you and everyone else a question:
Who is better to solve the nation’s problems on Day One walking into the office, Romney or Cain?
To me the easy answer is Romney as he has had both the political experience and knows how government works (which is important because after all we are electing politicians) and IS THE turnaround specialist when it comes to economics.
Cain has had the business background but not in the sense Romney has where Romney’s experience was actually looking at companies and figuring out WHY they were not producing.
It was people like Cain that called the Romney’s in to fix their challenges in business. this is who we need RIGHT now at this time in our country and I believe that is what people will realize as well.
g2825m on November 2, 2011 at 11:21 AM
A vote for an independent third party candidate is equal to helping Obama win. Anyone who is SERIOUS about removing our current POTUS from office would never even entertain the thought, let alone act on it.
lynncgb on November 2, 2011 at 11:22 AM
You have to be a conservative to have “fellow conservatives”.
besser tot als rot on November 2, 2011 at 11:25 AM
I disagree on this premise here: 1. Nominate Romney, get a traditional Republican moderate. The underlying problem of economic growth doesn’t get fixed,
Romney’s main mission is to turn around the economy and he has SHOWN that over and over and over in his career he can fix the problems! He immediately CUT taxes in MA in a blue state and so this premise on Romney is so far off.
g2825m on November 2, 2011 at 11:26 AM
Removing Obama is not the be al and end all. What if it was Obama v. Pol Pot. Would I have to vote for Pol Pot? I don’t think that Romney is Pol Pot, but I don’t think that he is a big enough improvement over Obama to warrant my vote. I also think that he is worse in the long run for the country.
besser tot als rot on November 2, 2011 at 11:27 AM
Oh, besser you are so funny!
What gives you this great insight to think I am not a conservative? I believe in EVERYTHING our party platform stands for multiplied by 10!
Please do not make cracks on people you do not know…
g2825m on November 2, 2011 at 11:28 AM
Me too. Romney is not a traditional moderate. Traditional moderates have a position that you know what you are going to get. Romney is a total crap shoot somewhere between left of center (which is how he governed) and right of center (which is where he is running as a campaign). I guess, like Obamacare, we have to vote for him to find out what we’re going to get … or something. Not going to happen.
besser tot als rot on November 2, 2011 at 11:31 AM
Well I do believe Pol Pot was for the Second Amendment and so far he is in the lead there… ;o)
g2825m on November 2, 2011 at 11:31 AM
I didn’t mean to make any implications about you – doesn’t your statement refer to Romney? That is the way that it reads …
besser tot als rot on November 2, 2011 at 11:32 AM
Therein lies our difference.
lynncgb on November 2, 2011 at 11:36 AM
Also, I respect your position. At least you’re not one of those Romney supports that comes in here and calls anyone who doesn’t support him “the fringe” or “an ideologue”. And I can understand supporting Romney – wanting to win – if you believe that he will actual govern as a conservative. I just don’t trust him at all. I don’t like his record, and that is what I tend to base my support on. Words are easy; governing as a conservative is hard.
besser tot als rot on November 2, 2011 at 11:36 AM
To me the most interesting result is the second choice one – Gingrich being the solid second choice, with both Cain and Perry making strong showings. I’m a little surprised the second choice is not Romney – 8% is a pretty bad number.
The question becomes how many of Cain’s supporters would go to Romney if he endorses him (which I expect he would) versus Perry versus third party.
The other million dollar question is will Gingrich back Perry? He seems to lean more toward Perry than Romney.
Y-not on November 2, 2011 at 11:37 AM
Besser and all…
Have you ever looked at Reagan’s votes and where he stood on issues?
Don’t misread me here as Reagan next to Jefferson and Washington are my favorite presidents BUT Reagan also has many Romney stances and yet you guys RIP on Romney constantly and I am afraid many in our party have become so convinced there is some candidate that can get elected by the MAJORITY of the population AND fit into your belief system. That candidate is not out there and neither was Reagan that way…the Dems just could never put up anyone better than Mondale and the Blue Dogs decided Reagan was better FOR THE COUNTRY.
See here these are all issues very similar to Romney:
Social Security:
Reagan: “There is no more important domestic issue on which we have to have a national consensus than social security … I am determined that we put social security back on a sound financial footing and restore the confidence and peace of mind of the American public in its social security system … I believe in the social security system. I believe that it will survive and keep its promise to this generation of beneficiaries and those to come.”
- Using Medicare/Medicaid to help people purchase private health insurance:
Reagan: “The plan expands opportunities for Medicare beneficiaries to use their benefits to enroll in private health plans as an alternative to traditional Medicare coverage”
- Tax incentive for health insurance:
Reagan: “Most employer contributions for employee health benefits should be tax free because this encourages employee health insurance.”
- State law different from federal law:
Reagan: “The nature of our constitutional system encourages a healthy diversity in the public policies adopted by the people of the several States according to their own conditions, needs, and desires. In the search for enlightened public policy, individual States and communities are free to experiment with a variety of approaches to public issues.” (October 26, 1987) 200 years earlier, James Madison explained the same concept,”The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite.” (January 26, 1788)
- Principled Compromise:
Reagan: “I’m not retreating an inch from where I was. But I also recognize this: There are some people who would have you so stand on principle that if you don’t get all that you’ve asked for from the legislature, why, you jump off the cliff with the flag flying. I have always figured that a half a loaf is better than none, and I know that in the democratic process you’re not going to always get everything you want. So, I think what they’ve misread is times in which I have compromised.”
g2825m on November 2, 2011 at 11:38 AM
WOW…
If I was Romney I am not sure I would want the endorsement of the PArty’s last failed attempt at gaining the presidency, or the endorsement of their family members!
RedLizard64 on November 2, 2011 at 11:39 AM
no worries! I NEVER call people names no matter what candidate they vote for…I just ask people to TRULY be fair in looking at other candidates statements they ACTUALLY said not “requotes” from other pundits or posters that imply what a person believes which happens constantly here.
I even defend all our candidates like Perry, Cain, Bachmann,if someone is bashing on them and their quote is false or a half-truth.
g2825m on November 2, 2011 at 11:42 AM
Yep. That is what it boils down to. I have 6 small kids and I’d rather suffer now for them to have a chance at a good future. I’m playing long here and I don’t trust Romney to do what is right in the long term.
Look at what has happened to Mass a few years after Romney is out of office. It is a basket case. Yes, I know there is a Dem governor now, but there will be another Dem president too. We need to make some major changes to get a sustainable government going – that the Dems won’t be able to screw up immediately (like Reagan was able to accomplish). I don’t think that Romney has that vision and will merely tinker at the edges. In the meantime, I think he will destroy the conservative movement and the GOP with his lack of principle.
besser tot als rot on November 2, 2011 at 11:42 AM
Here is what this survey tells us empirically
Hotair needs to get better participation from younger and female ppl
georgealbert on November 2, 2011 at 11:44 AM
My big problem is that I truly do not know where he stands. I don’t want to have to get him into office to find out.
besser tot als rot on November 2, 2011 at 11:44 AM
That is rough, RedLizard haha…however, I am not a big Meghan fan either! She is a fellow Arizonan!
Any of you see what Sheriff Joe is doing with Obama’s Birth Certificate and SS card “issue”? Should be interesting what he finds through the power of the law that so many other judges have swatted away from fellow countrymen.
g2825m on November 2, 2011 at 11:46 AM
JetBoy on November 2, 2011 at 8:50 AM
Here’s an idea-you can support Cain and I’ll support Romney.
Together we get get two bad candidates-one a conservative Joe Biden and one a Rino-out of the race.
Wonder Twins…UNITE!
annoyinglittletwerp on November 2, 2011 at 11:52 AM
I understand what your concerns are. Here is what Romney has stated in a nutshell:
He said to be successful, the seven necessary ingredients are:
1. Tax rates that keep America competitive with other countries.
2. A regulatory environment that encourages entrepreneurs.
3. Effective trade policies.
4. Energy policy that takes advantage of American resources.
5. Rule of law.
6. Institutions that build human capital, in other words, high-performing schools.
7. Immigration policy that is effective.
“And we can’t allow government to spend more than it takes in,” he added.
I can give you other quotes and actual votes such as cutting taxes in MA, leaving 2 Billion there that as you stated the next DEM Governor blew right through, pro-2nd Amendment, Pro-life, and on these last 2 issues he governed that way signing bills in MA to support and protect those. On AGW he ASKED the question wondering what man’s role may be and HAS never said that he was ALL for what Gore believes. He even stated that he is against spending trillions of dollars “trying” to find out man’s role, he is against illegal immigration and FOR building the fence and…
These are all the same issues he ran on LAST election. This is conservative so I do not know why people have allowed themselves to be so convinced he is a lefty!
g2825m on November 2, 2011 at 11:55 AM
I like Cain and the current ‘scandal’ hasn’t changed my opinion of hime. However, when you watch him answer any question, he seems to be lacking too much knowledge of current events and world affairs. When he is being interviewed, pay attention to his answers. He just doesn’t have them.
Oleta on November 2, 2011 at 11:56 AM
Oh really?
In 2008, under 30 was only 18%.
In 2010, under 30 was only 11%.
Doesn’t look like a “much larger segment” to me.
And lets remember that 08 was a particularly high turnout year for the under 30 crowd, one that won’t be repeated in 2012 now that the “historic presidency” is such a flop for them.
Jason Coleman on November 2, 2011 at 12:01 PM
“Michael Moore: We’re Going To Replace Capitalism As We Know It”
Why we need to replace Obama because these are his friends and inside his own head this is how Obama thinks as well…
and ANY of our candidates do NOT believe this including those of you who dishonestly like to throw Romney as Obama-lite which is ridiculous.
g2825m on November 2, 2011 at 12:02 PM
JC always coming up with the stats! nice job! btw I am in the 40+ crowd if you are keeping track…haha
g2825m on November 2, 2011 at 12:03 PM
WRONG!
It was people like Cain that businesses tapped to get down to basics, roll up their sleeves and fix businesses.
It was people like Romney they called to create complex financial vehicles to prop up businesses so they could be parted out or liquidated.
Jason Coleman on November 2, 2011 at 12:04 PM
But if you take out the “requotes” and the “what s/he really means” there would only be one (if even that) blog entry per day at HA.
:D
whatcat on November 2, 2011 at 12:04 PM
We’ll see what happens with Cain. With his China trying to develop their “nuclear capability” and this article that is just breaking, he may not last much longer:
http://www.ktok.com/cc-common/news/sections/newsarticle.html?feed=119211&article=9339922#ixzz1cZ3IJ2nV
He seems to get a lot of passes on his gaffes. How many more does he get until we start to worry if Obama will walk away with this with Cain as our nominee?
kerrhome on November 2, 2011 at 12:10 PM
I still believe that by voting third party, you will still not get ANY of what you are looking for, as that candidate will not win. Obama will deliver nothing in the way of conservatism. Any of the Republican candidates will get us more than that.
lynncgb on November 2, 2011 at 12:12 PM
Only 4% of self-identified moderate Republicans bothered to take the poll, which I am guessing is representative of Hot Air readership.
Given the strong core-conservative identification of all the GOP primary candidates except Romney and Huntsman, I would say Mitt and his people are where they want to be right about now. I’m sure Team Romney would very much like to take Iowa, which would help solidify Romney’s carefully built aura of inevitability, but they had to know a Not Romney candidate would emerge, a conservative counter to the choice of establishment types and right-of-center moderates. They probably thought the Not Romney would be Perry, and are equally probably relieved it isn’t.
Several weeks to go before the first ballot is cast. The smart move for Cain right now would be to stand pat and refrain as much as practicable from unscripted retail politicking events and press interviews, given his impulsive tendency to speak before he thinks. His campaign manager knows this, of course, which is why talk about ‘slowing down the campaign’ started springing up.
Prediction: in the next GOP primary debate, Romney will strive to take the discussion into wonk territory, full of policy details and multiple levels of complexity, and more or less dare Cain to follow. Even more specifically, I would guess foreign policy, since only Gingrich and Huntsman have any in-depth foreign policy chops. For Herman ‘Right of Return’ Cain, ‘Here There Be Monsters’.
troyriser_gopftw on November 2, 2011 at 12:13 PM
I’d love to see those, I actually would, because:
When Romney pitched S&P to raise their bond rating so he could borrow money, he used a powerpoint (published by the WSJ) that showed that his July 2002 legislation would:
Increase FY 2003 taxes by 1.2 billion
Increase FY 2004 taxes by 1.6 billion
And increase state fees by over a quarter of a billion annually
Romney’s Pitch to S&P Boasted of Revenue Raisers
Jason Coleman on November 2, 2011 at 12:14 PM
I continue to be mystified by the Rubio boomlet. He’s young and good-looking, but those are really his only credentials at this point. he does not have any significant accomplishments. He’s only been a Senator for 10 months and his time as a state representative left no impact behind.
AngusMc on November 2, 2011 at 12:16 PM
11% in 2010? Lol. Yeah, no…
http://www.civicyouth.org/official-youth-turnout-rate-in-2010-was-24/
24%.
And btw, you have to add in those 29-35, which increases the percentage even more. It’s closer to 30%, not 17%.
Bottom line is that the demographics in these polls represent nothing close to what an actual eleciton looks like.
nickj116 on November 2, 2011 at 12:18 PM
*election
nickj116 on November 2, 2011 at 12:18 PM
JC, I believe you are wrong on this point. Romney was called in by companies such as Staples, Sports Authority, et al to come in and help fix their businesses to be better run and he succeeded. Where a company was so far ran into the ground he only had two options either tell the owner to file for bankruptcy or make it leaner and sell it off or file. The majority of time he was successful for both the business owner and yes, his company, Bain Capital. This is what firms are there for though to help other companies out and to get paid for your services.
g2825m on November 2, 2011 at 12:19 PM
I must protest. After beating Obama last week in a head to head match up with 97%, why isn’t Lawn Gnome in this weeks poll?
As his campaign manager, I’m sure I’ll be getting a call very soon from him demanding an answer.
BobMbx on November 2, 2011 at 12:21 PM
Guess that settles who’s behind the story.
Willson-Perkins-Allen Opinion Research works for a Texan.
Stupid, stupid, stupid move by said Texan.
Jason Coleman on November 2, 2011 at 12:22 PM
The well funded campaign use internal polling numbers and have results a week before the other Polling organisations have them.
So this Cain polling explosion was the trigger for the coordinated High Tech Lynching of this good black man as a sexual predator.
That should teach the voters a thing or two.
Karl Rove and his little buddy “Romney the loser” Uber Alles.
jimw on November 2, 2011 at 12:22 PM
Total BS. By your logic, it was people like Romney who drove the economy into recession. Unsuccessful CEO’s that mismanage their otherwise good businesses get taken over by private equity firms. To lump in Cain with that group because he, too, was a CEO is laughably ridiculous.
Herman Cain turned around Burger King in the Philadelphia area, then turned around Godfather’s Pizza (which was heading towards bankruptcy before Cain took over). He took organizations that were running very poorly and made them successful.
Romney’s experience is purely corporate, while Cain’s experience is a combination of production and corporate. This is the true difference among them.
free-thinker on November 2, 2011 at 12:27 PM
I answered a question similar to this on another thread.
You have to understand where a lot of Cain’s current support is coming from. It is due to what can be called the “celebrity effect”. He is the new Obama replete with a slogan “9-9-9″. A lot of people usually want to be seen as being part of the “cool” movement. Their neighbors like Cain so they like him too.
Right until scandals like this weeks’s “sexual harrasment” claims hit. Then they start to question themselves: “How well do I really know this guy? Let me run to my known quantity (Perry, Romney, Obama)…”
Then you see things like McCain winning the primary the last time around happening. Most primary voters once within the polling booth will vote for the known quantity not a fantasy.
TheRightMan on November 2, 2011 at 12:27 PM
troyriser,
Are you saying that Romney/Huntsman voters are not core-conservatives? If that is what you are saying you do not know how wrong you are my friend. Since you chose two Mormon candidates, whether by choice I do not know and I do not think there was any ill intent there…I will say that there are no more God-loving, gun-loving, anti-abortion, family-loving, low taxes (because of having to pay for those families haha), military loving, core-conservatives than Mormons! thus so are their followers. Huntsman who I DO NOT support was the one after all to ACTUALLY implement a flat tax in Utah.
Just curious though about your comment.
g2825m on November 2, 2011 at 12:27 PM
Do you really, really want to start a list vs. list of the number of companies Romney liquidated\parted out versus those he “saved”?
Jason Coleman on November 2, 2011 at 12:27 PM
Did you just say Mormons love their country more than Christians???
portlandon on November 2, 2011 at 12:30 PM
How does one square Romney’s recent statement with his past decision to cap carbon emissions on energy producers in MA?
Not the first flip-flop, and it won’t be the last. Mitt Romney is like Obamacare–you have to vote for him to find out what’s inside.
free-thinker on November 2, 2011 at 12:31 PM
I want to see the list!!! :-)
Punchenko on November 2, 2011 at 12:34 PM
My comment was not BS because it was companies that called Romney in to help them turn it around and be more successful and he was successful 10 times more than he failed. So he DID save thousands of jobs and HELPED the economy. I was not knocking Cain but just saying Romney has MORE experience of doing this more often and many more years in fixing companies where I’ll give you Cain did it twice with his model in the restaurant business. Where Romney’s experience is in ALL kinds of various businesses and how to turn them around from restaurant to office products to construction companies to financial etc. And so, YES, he does have a better grasp on what works and what doesn’t when it comes to businesses AND he also was a Governor over a State which Cain has not been and cannot understand how a government is supposed to function (not counting the current one).
THIS is why Romney is the better candidate over all the others.
g2825m on November 2, 2011 at 12:35 PM
jimw on November 2, 2011 at 12:22 PM
Cain a good conservative-but comparing what he’s going through now is NOTHING compared to what Justice Thomas and his family were put through.
I certainly don’t believe that Cain sexually harassed anyone. Obviously that hit machine is going into full gear-but his other problems-mainly his constant ‘gaffes’-are of his OWN making.
Cain is his OWN worst enemy.
annoyinglittletwerp on November 2, 2011 at 12:36 PM
Romney’s intra-party polling has always been weakest with conservatives and strongest with moderates.
Theo Huntsman’s intra-party polling has always been simply weak.
Neither polling has anything to do with their Mormonism, don’t try to use the Mormon card to support your candidates, it will backfire as the Baptist and Methodist cards are much stronger.
Jason Coleman on November 2, 2011 at 12:37 PM
You should be more worried about how you’re going to defend Newt’s first marriage.
Jason Coleman on November 2, 2011 at 12:38 PM
You are just repeating the liberal Republican machines talking points that they’ve told you
They did the EXACT same thing to Reagan
Gallup had Reagan losing to Carter by 25 percent in March 1980.
“moderate” Republicans said Reagan was not electable in the general and a more “moderate” candidate had a far better chance.
Daddy Bush called Reagans economic plan,….voodoo economics
All the media claimed that Reagan only had support from the “far right”
Reagans alledged “gaffes” were just as “shocking” to the liberals
It was all just bull then and it’s bull now
LeeSeneca on November 2, 2011 at 12:38 PM
I was going to say he did this through closing tax loopholes BUT then I also (as a good poster)clicked on your link and YOUR article from WSJ said it for me via Romney:
“Gov. Romney never favored, never advocated, and never signed a tax increase into law. In fact, he cut taxes 19 times. The rating agencies rewarded Massachusetts during Gov. Romney’s term with a credit rating upgrade. They cited an improving state economy and prudent financial management. It’s a sharp contrast to the failures of President Obama, which has resulted in millions of lost jobs, a broken budget and America’s first-ever downgrade,” said Romney campaign aide Eric Fehrnstrom.
Reagan said:
-Tax Loopholes:
Reagan: “Tax loopholes have been closed, making the tax structure more equitable.”
Mr. Weisman. “But in addition to that, you’re also talking about loopholes, tax breaks, whatever you want to call it.
“The President. I hesitate, I won’t answer that now, as to what all will be in the study. We are, as I said before, in our present proposal, we are changing some that we believe, while they were undoubtedly well-intentioned, they have led to some taking an, getting an advantage that is denied to others. Where that is true, then that should be corrected, whether you have a deficit or have a tax reform or not.
- Fees:
Reagan: “Good tax policy decrees that wherever possible a fee for a service should be assessed against those who directly benefit from that service. Our highways were built largely with such a user fee — the gasoline tax. I think it makes sense to follow that principle in restoring them to the condition we all want them to be in.”
Reagan: “These taxes and fees will raise approximately $1 billion per year over the next five years, which should provide adequate, stable, and equitable financing for the program. I strongly believe that funds used to pay for the program should be generated entirely through these dedicated sources, not the general treasury.”
Reagan: “The third component of the deficit reduction program involves user fees, or more appropriately, the recovery of costs borne by the taxpayers generally, but that predominantly benefit a limited group of businesses, communities or individuals … it is simply inexcusable and intolerable that yacht owners escape without paying even a small part of the Coast Guard services; or that commercial and general aviation are not paying the cost of the air traffic control system that ensures their safety; or that ship and barge operators do not pay a fair share of the costs of waterways maintained by the Federal Government. Our user fee package corrects these and similar shortcomings in current budget policy and will contribute significantly toward reducing the deficit.”
So it appears I agree with Reagan…and Romney
g2825m on November 2, 2011 at 12:41 PM
No anti-Mormon bias was being evinced. I grew up in a part of rural Indiana with a strong Mormon community, lots of Mormon neighbors, and count several as friends. No, I was referring to Romney’s and Huntsman’s fixed point location on the right-to-left ideological line: both are considered moderate Republicans. The rest of the candidates–Perry, Bachmann, Cain, Santorum–are considered capital-C Conservatives. Newt Gingrich placed himself in a category of his own when he shared a divan with Nancy Pelosi and professed faith in the Church of Global Warming. I don’t classify Ron Paul as conservative, moderate or liberal. Crazy is hard to categorize.
troyriser_gopftw on November 2, 2011 at 12:43 PM
One and the same to MOST people…but I am not turning this into some religious thread as Jason Coleman thinks I may be… :o)
I was only pointing out a fact, as I am Mormon, that all those qualities I mentioned are the truth! Why do you think every year there is NO MORE OF A RED STATE for the Republican candidate than Utah. I mean even during the Clinton years he came in third! haha
g2825m on November 2, 2011 at 12:47 PM
I didn’t think you were but had to ask as some on here turn these threads into Anti-Mormon posts and we all aren’t here for that reading…
Thanks, Troy!
g2825m on November 2, 2011 at 12:48 PM
Er, @JasonColeman…
http://hotair.com/archives/2011/11/02/hot-air-presidential-survey-results/comment-page-2/#comment-5054294
nickj116 on November 2, 2011 at 12:54 PM
These aren’t Liberal republicans asking about cain’s gaffe’s. He has made these statements, as Rush pointed out that Andy McCarthy on NRO pointed out, just in the last month:
“Cain’s made a number of conflicting statements on matters of substance (e.g., negotiating with terrorists, abortion, the propriety of killing al-Qaeda’s Anwar al-Awlaki, etc.”
And I will add his electrical fence comment, his latest remembering/not remembering what happened in this case as more keeps trickling out especially now that his camp knows that the woman may come forward he may start to recall even more…
My point is that we do not want to get to far down the road and find out it is too late…
g2825m on November 2, 2011 at 12:54 PM
I warned you against trying to play the card.
Which you then promptly used. Doubling down actually.
Now you’re going to have more than one commenter in here drag out all of the problems with Mormonism and the military. You’re also going to have to defend the Mormons are better conservatives than other denominations charge that you inadvertently made.
Nice job.
If you think Romney’s detractors are going to split hairs when there’s audio and a powerpoint of Romney talking about raising revenue and how that’s a good reason to lend MA more money and raise it’s bond rating so it can issue it’s own debt, you’re mistaken.
If Romney had flattened the tax rates and not merely shifted and increased the overall tax burden, you’d have an argument. He did cut some taxes on individuals, and raised them on businesses and through fees.
The powerpoint and the audio are the problems there, and the nature of the requests.
Can you show that he actually decreased the MA tax burden??? No, you can’t, exactly the opposite is true.
Setting it up so more people have to pay less while some and businesses have to pay more is not going to win Romney votes in a Republican primary.
Jason Coleman on November 2, 2011 at 12:59 PM
Do everyone a favor and do so (if you have it handy).
RedLizard64 on November 2, 2011 at 1:08 PM
Romney is still the only one that can give Obama a challenge.
That’s just the way it is.
It is all refreshingly mostly Palin-free though, so that’s nice.
Moesart on November 2, 2011 at 1:14 PM
Cain’s campaign is an utter failure.
He just can’t get his numbers up.
balkanmom on November 2, 2011 at 1:19 PM
Tax Burden in Massachusetts
They claim the total tax burden in MA went up under Romney. This falsely implies that Romney raised taxes. In truth, some communities in MA chose to raise property taxes at the local level which Romney had no control over (7).
Some critics claim that Romney’s cuts in state spending forced local communities to raise their taxes, but the fact is they were under no obligation to raise taxes. Romney also closed loopholes in existing tax law, allowing the state to collect taxes from those who had been using schemes to reduce income reported on state tax returns (8).
Some critics falsely assert that Romney raised capital gains tax rates. In truth, the tax increase was enacted before Romney was elected governor but took effect during Romney’s term after having been tied up in court for several years(9). Critics are unable to point to any tax increases from Romney. Moreover, they fail to note that Romney repeatedly proposed tax cuts, which were shot down by the Democratic MA legislature, starting as soon as he began to turn around the economy, prompting the liberal Boston Globe to complain after Romney’s first year in office, “The first signs of life appear in the Massachusetts economy and the governor calls for a $225 million tax cut.”(10)
Fees
Some people believe Romney’s increases in fees are identical to taxes. On the contrary, Romney saved millions of tax dollars by ending the taxpayer subsidizing of fees. A fee covers the cost for a special good or service provided to an individual by the government; when a fee is not high enough to cover the cost of the service provided, taxpayers end up subsidizing. Romney shifted the burden from the community onto the individual who benefits from the service provided.
Every state raises fees to keep up with the cost of service. Texas Governor Rick Perry, for instance, has accurately stated that he has not raised taxes. He has however raised fees by several billion dollars. In MA, some fees had not been raised in a very long time.
Ronald Reagan was an outspoken proponent of fees. For instance, here is one of Reagan’s many statements: “The third component of the deficit reduction program involves user fees, or more appropriately, the recovery of costs borne by the taxpayers generally, but that predominantly benefit a limited group of businesses, communities or individuals … it is simply inexcusable and intolerable that yacht owners escape without paying even a small part of the Coast Guard services; or that commercial and general aviation are not paying the cost of the air traffic control system that ensures their safety; or that ship and barge operators do not pay a fair share of the costs of waterways maintained by the Federal Government. Our user fee package corrects these and similar shortcomings in current budget policy and will contribute significantly toward reducing the deficit” (February 8, 1982).
g2825m on November 2, 2011 at 1:20 PM
Boston Globe reported it got even worse:
“ “It’s the worst I’ve seen it. Going back to the post-war era, I’ve never seen such an acute and focused fiscal crisis and particularly for the state government,” said Richard P. Nathan, director of the Nelson Rockefeller Institute of Government at the State University of New York-Albany…
“The estimated budget gap of $547 million in Massachusetts is among the largest in total dollars, according to the report by the National Conference of State Legislatures… Massachusetts officials have predicted that in the next fiscal year the shortfall will far exceed an earlier projection of $2 billion.”
The Boston Globe – Deficits studies say crisis is worst since WWII – Dec 5, 2002
It continued to get worse. By the time Mitt Romney took office as governor of Massachusetts, the upcoming state budget for that year would have a structural deficit of nearly $3 billion if the budget was not cut. [3] Furthermore, the existing budget passed the previous year, that would be in effect for several more months, had a projected total deficit of approximately $1.2 billion [4]. He inherited about a $650 million deficit in that budget by the time he took office. [5]
Governor Romney convinced the legislature to allow him to immediately make changes to the existing budget. He immediately slashed spending and balanced that budget. [6] He then balanced each of the four annual budgets he created. He was dealing with a veto-proof legislature that was 85% democrat, but he was able to ‘hold the line on all the spending that the democrats up there wanted to do.’ [7] The budgets he submitted, fought for and succeeded in obtaining not only were balanced each year, but provided a surplus of $700 million in 2004, [8] nearly $1 billion in 2005 [9a],[9b],[9c] and a surplus of $700 million in 2006. He balanced the budget every year without raising taxes. [10] By the end of his term, he had taken “Massachusetts from billions in deficit to billions in surplus”. [11] He turned in a $2 billion rainy day fund at the end of his term in office. [12]
g2825m on November 2, 2011 at 1:22 PM
Never implied or insinuated that Mormons “are better conservatives” just that “we are God-loving, gun-loving, anti-abortion, family-loving, low taxes (because of having to pay for those families haha), military loving, core-conservatives” AND the reason why the state of Utah votes at a higher rate for the Republican candidate because Mormon values line up perfectly with the Conservative values.
g2825m on November 2, 2011 at 1:28 PM
Um, Nick, I don’t want to beat up on you too hard, BUT. . .
There are some significant problems with your cite.
Firstly, the headline “Official Youth Turnout Rate in 2010 was 24%”
Followed by the first sentence, “An estimated 24% of young people (ages 18-29) voted in the 2010 midterm elections”.
Circle’s report was shown to be off by 50% in a number of states, like Oregon, North Carolina, Louisiana, California, the “New’s”, Florida etc, etc.
Drill into CIRCLE’s report and you’ll see that they aren’t basing their numbers on actual voters, but a combination of exit polling and voter registration numbers.
Voter registrations inherently skew toward the younger demographic. People lie about their age.
Look at Roper, Census data and actual reporting from the Sec State’s and you’ll see that the under 30 crowd is usually around 15% historically with spikes and valleys.
Something magical happens at the big 3-0 and voter participation rates skyrocket.
CIRCLE is a young voter project, one that has a bad track record for calling estimates and extrapolations “official”.
Now we’re both guilty of attacking the source rather than the claim.
I’ll admit that, happily so. And I’ll also admit that the younger demographic is underrepresented at HotAir because the younger demographic is, by the numbers, less politically active.
Yet, to say that the younger demographic is significantly underrepresented here in relationship to actual voter demographics, is in my view, incorrect.
Now of course we could use CIRCLE rather than Roper and Sec States’ if you’d like, and by CIRCLE numbers, voter participation among the young demographic fell by 60% in 2010, which brings us to another problem where in the report just referenced, CIRCLE cites a 20.9 percent rate, not the “official” 24%.
CIRCLE is a flawed source, deeply flawed.
If you’d like to continue to play this rather pointless game, we can, but I’d suggest using something like ESRI for our data.
Jason Coleman on November 2, 2011 at 1:35 PM
I’m sorry, this is clunky.
I should have said “People lie about their age in exit polling.”
Jason Coleman on November 2, 2011 at 1:37 PM
Everyone should check out some of the comments here
Amazing the number of people that are upset about the CAIN NDA story…especially the number of people that say they are donating money to is campaign becasue of it…because they feel (know) that it is either the MSM, DNC, or RNC.
RedLizard64 on November 2, 2011 at 1:41 PM
Look, you’re forcing me to do something I don’t want to do, but I will point out again, that the fight you’re going to have is with the 30 second sound bite not the convoluted cross-referenced explanation.
So here’s an example that hopefully will help you.
I have a product that I charge 1.00 for. I want to generate news that I’m lowering my prices, so I cut by a penny to 99, then I cut again to 98, then I cut again to 97 and continue to to this for a total of 19 price cuts.
Then on the backend I slap a 25 cent fuel and handling surcharge on my product taken at the distribution level.
Has the price of my product gone down? Yes, it has. Has the cost of my product to the retailer or consumer gone down? No it hasn’t.
Romney supporters can come out and say “he cut taxes 19 times”, yet, but not on everyone. Cutting the rate on someone already covered by deductions is a political shell game.
Romney BOASTED that he “raised revenue” to S&P. There is audio and a powerpoint to that effect. He made the boast to A) borrow more money and B) raise his bond rating to issue the state’s own debt.
THAT is a problem. The net effect was a tax INCREASE for the state.
That’s what Romney has to battle. You increase spending, decrease taxes, and wind up with a surplus? That’s a set-up that will come back to bite Romney and bite him hard once the media is not pumping him as the “eventual” and “presumptive” and “inevitable” nominee and they turn their sights on him.
Unfortunately you may not have intended to do so, but as an atheist who watches how these fights go with interest, in effect, you did.
Jason Coleman on November 2, 2011 at 1:48 PM
Romney on MA while he Governed:
While jobs were shrinking by the thousands each month in Massachusetts when he took office [16], by the time he left office, “the state had attracted hundreds of new companies and added [a net total of] 60,000 new jobs.” [17] It takes time for pro-growth policies to effect the economy, but before the end of his first year in office the job losses had stopped, and in his remaining time in office 81,000 new jobs were created. [18] The people in the state benefited not only by increased employment and not having their taxes raised, but they also saw attempted and successful tax cuts by the governor.
He sought to lower the state income tax from 5.3% to 5.0% but was unable to get the legislature to agree. [19]
But he did succeed in lowering the total taxes paid to Massachusetts from an average of 7.33% of residents’ income in 2003 when he entered office to 6.99% in 2007 when he left office and the year of his final budget. During that period, taxes paid to other states increased from an average of 2.6% of residents’ income in 2003 to 2.9% in 2007, resulting in the total state and local tax burden on Massachusetts residents being 9.9% in 2007, the same rate as it was in 2003. During that same period, from 2003-2007, the average state and local tax burden in the U.S. increased from 9.6% of income to 9.8%. Governor Romney bucked the trend resulting in Massachusetts dropping from the 13th highest taxed state in the nation, to the 17th. [20][21]
This 7.33% to 6.99% tax drop is more incredible when one takes into account that those rates include local taxes which went up during that period, particularly after his first year in office when he cut spending (after which he focused more on tax cuts rather than more spending cuts).
In fact Governor Romney cut taxes 19 times. [22]
The following article points out many of his successful tax cuts:
“He cut capital gains taxes, benefiting well over 150,000 residents. Thousands more are currently benefiting from new jobs in the biotech field because of Romney’s manufacturing tax relief and because he made the investment tax credit permanent. Thousands of Massachusetts families saved their hard-earned dollars when Romney enacted sales tax holidays. Seniors are benefiting from property tax relief proposed and signed into law by Romney. Our honorable veterans and National Guard members have several new tax breaks because of Romney’s belief that they should be taxed less. Commuters can now deduct expenses for travel because Romney believes they shouldn’t be penalized for helping increase commerce.”
Boston Globe – Romney is the kind of leader we need – Dec 14, 2007
g2825m on November 2, 2011 at 1:50 PM
If Wilson is the source, as it appears he may be by his statements, it’s a certain Texas candidate who is the pusher of the story.
Unfortunate, but it looks like the Texan may have just shot himself in the other foot.
Jason Coleman on November 2, 2011 at 1:51 PM
Please don’t cut and paste large chunks with footnotes and links stripped, just post the link and excerpt.
Jason Coleman on November 2, 2011 at 1:52 PM
Cain is a nice man, and a smart businessman. However, I am afraid that he is not ready for prime time in the world of presidential politics. Last night on Fox Special Report with Bret Baier, the panel – Krauthammer, Steve Hayes and A.B. Stoddard – interviewed him and it was excruciating to watch. Mr. Cain didn’t answer the questions that were asked, appeared very ill-at-ease, gave answers that even I know are dumb and/or evasive, and generally did a very poor job of presenting himself as a knowledgeable, prepared candidate. I squirmed in my chair watching a nominally friendly panel take him apart nut by bolt. He may be leading in the polls, but Obama will make mincemeat out of him if he gets the Republican nomination without some serious coming up to speed.
coppertop on November 2, 2011 at 1:54 PM
and more:
STATE DROPPED IN TAX-BURDEN RANKINGS:
During Governor Romney’s tenure from 2003-7, Massachusetts dropped from 13th to 17th in national tax burden rankings. Gov. Romney created the 2004, 2005, 2006 and 2007 budgets (and slashed spending in the existing 2003 budget as soon as he entered office). Massachusetts’ combined state and local tax burden was the same in 2007, the year he left office, as it was in 2003 when he took office, at 9.9%.
However, he cut taxes while city and county governments within the state raised them, which along with Massachusetts residents being charged increased taxes by other states, caused a small bulge in the tax burden in the years in between. But the tax burden ended at the same level in the year of his final budget as in the year he entered office, with the help of the tax cuts that he made.
This improvement in tax burden rankings occurred while Massachusetts experienced the worst economic situation in the nation and had the highest ratio in the nation of democrats controlling the legislature, a veto-proof 85%, whose leadership stated intentions to raise taxes. (See record survey above and Taxes/Fees link above for details.)
Contrast that with other fmr. governors considering a 2012 presidential run:
• Rick Perry. Texas’ tax burden increased 0.8% during his tenure, from 7.1% when he took office in 2000, to 7.9% in 2009 (the latest year data is available), maintaining the ranking of the 45th most taxed state in the nation.
• Tim Pawlenty. Minnesota’s tax burden increased 1/2% during his tenure, from 9.8% when he took office in 2003, to 10.3% in 2009 (the latest year data is available), changing his state from the 17th most taxed state to the 7th most taxed state in the nation.
• Sarah Palin. Alaska’s tax burden increased 0.9% during her tenure, from 5.4% when she took office in 2006 to 6.3% when she left in 2009, maintaining the ranking of the state with the lowest tax burden in the nation.
TaxFoundation.org – State-Local Tax Burdens, All States – 1977-2009
The tax burden on citizens of each state include the taxes they must pay their own state and that they must pay other states.
As noted in the ‘Record as Governor’ section above, taxes that Massachusetts citizens actually paid to Massachusetts dropped during Mitt Romney’s term in office from 7.33% to 6.99% although the overall tax burden started and ended at 9.9%, due to other states taxing Massachusetts residents more, from 2.6% of their income to 2.9%.
TaxFoundation.org – State-Local Tax Burdens, Massachusetts – 1977-2009
By contrast:
• The taxes Texas citizens paid to Texas increased over 0.4% from 5.15% in 2000 to 5.56% in 2009 (the last year data was available) under Rick Perry’s watch for a total tax burden increase on Texas residents from 7.1% to 7.9%.
TaxFoundation.org – State-Local Tax Burdens, Texas – 1977-2009
• The taxes Minnesota citizens paid to Minnesota increased over 0.4% from 7.37% in 2003 to 7.78% in 2009 (the last year data was available) under Tim Pawlenty’s watch for a total tax burden increase on Minnesota residents from 9.8% to 10.3%.
TaxFoundation.org – State-Local Tax Burdens, Minnesota – 1977-2009
• Taxes Alaska residents paid to Alaska went up by over 1.25% during Sarah Palin’s watch, from 2.78% in 2006 to 4.04% in 2009, while taxes Alaska residents paid to other states dropped from 2.6% to 2.3% for a combined increase from 5.4% to 6.3%.
TaxFoundation.org – State-Local Tax Burdens, Alaska – 1977-2009
All this was done in a 85% controlled Democratic legislature
Tired of people’s crap about Romney not being a conservative! He CUT TAXES like we have been screaming at Obama to do and to get Gov’t out of our lives.
g2825m on November 2, 2011 at 1:55 PM
I do this because most people will not click on the link and not read what NEEDS to be read…
Sick of the Romney spin out there by many posters. Am I saying Romney is perfect? No. However, Jason, for our current situation our country is in now Romney is THE right choice to get the economy turned around.
I am signing off now.
Good nite all from Afghanistan!
g2825m on November 2, 2011 at 2:00 PM
Agreed! i like the guy but he is NOT READY for POTUS. He should first try out in the Minor leagues…State legislatures… Congress…maybe even a crack at GA Governor but NOT POTUS on your first go around. I know he ran earlier in the state elections and lost but first get elected at that level and then move to the MAJORS.
Okay, now good nite!
g2825m on November 2, 2011 at 2:03 PM
Good night, g2825, and God bless you for your service to the country. We might disagree on our preferences for candidates but on this we can agree – you are doing a great job!
TheRightMan on November 2, 2011 at 2:31 PM
The problem with playing the “Mormon Card” on Romney is that it’s actually the other way around. Most people reject Romney for other reasons than his Mormonism. But there seem to be a lot of Mormons who call themselves “strong conservatives” but still support Romney over much more conservative candidates. We saw this in Nevada during the 2008 primaries, and we see it over and over here on Hot Air.
The big problem with Romney is that you can’t trust him to do what he says. His political positions change based on where he wants to position himself at the moment. When running for governor of Massachusetts, he ran to the left of Kennedy and dissociated himself from Reagan at every opportunity. When he ran in 2008, he suddenly discovered he was pro-life after all, and positioned himself as a conservative. This was when the talking heads on the right decided he seemed like the best choice. In 2011, being staunchly conservative was no longer to his advantage, so he positions himself as a moderate pro-business “competent” executive.
Which is the real Mitt Romney? Probably none of them.
All the shilling for him in the world won’t change the impression of him as a slick “I’ll stand for whatever you want me to stand for. Today.” classic politician.
The liberals won’t throw in the towel if a Republican gets elected. We need a Republican who will actually correct Obama’s excesses, rather than one who inspired at least one of them.
A vote for Romney is a vote to enshrine Obama’s policies as the new standard. The only really solid reason to vote for Romney in the general election is in hope of decent conservative court nominations. And I wouldn’t even count on that.
didymus on November 2, 2011 at 2:35 PM
ross perot > trump > rent-is-too-damn-high guy > palin > herb cain
Thanks for the yucks, guys!
benny shakar on November 2, 2011 at 2:38 PM
Then I’m positive you have considered the fact that Obama could nominate two more progressives to the SCOTUS during a second term. And your children will have the pleasure of suffering under the rulings they will make for the next 20+ years. I am sure your kids will appreciate you standing your ground in an effort you know is a lost cause.
csdeven on November 2, 2011 at 2:41 PM
Make sure you tell your children the truth when Obama nominates 2 more progressives to the SCOTUS and they have to suffer under the rulings it subjects them to for a large portion of their lives. Make sure you tell them you were “doing it for them!”.
csdeven on November 2, 2011 at 2:48 PM
Amen! I don’t think even Romney knows where he stands on some issues because it depends which audience he’s talking to. So Romney was governor of MA. How does that in any way make him more “ready” to lead on day one? How does it make Romney more knowledgeable or wise (I prefer wisdom to knowledge) in foreign relations?
It stinks that the GOP itself is selling out the peoples’ choice for candidates by throwing mud. Everyone needs to think twice about how many upper echelon GOP party members have said Cain will NOT be the nominee and Romney will. Do you really want them stealing your vote from you? Let’s buck the good ole boy political system and insist on OUR candidate.
Riding the Cain Train!
katablog.com on November 2, 2011 at 3:54 PM
There isn’t any real evidence that Romney will nominate conservatives to the court. Being the profile in political courage that Kendoll Romney is, he would probably nominate another Souter in hopes that no one could be sure what kind of judge the nominee would be.
That’s a mighty slim hook to hang your hopes on.
didymus on November 2, 2011 at 3:57 PM
Right, because Mitt Romney has given me so much reason to trust him in doing this. The man who appointed John Holdren…the man who made certain there was a seat for Planned Parenthood on the board overseeing the implementation of his healthcare program when it wasn’t even that evil ol MA court that made him do it!!!. The man who wrote this.
Yep…he’s a conservative all right./
I don’t trust him as far as I could throw him. He’s given me no reason to. I get the same feeling from him that I got the first time I saw Bill Clinton interviewed and it isn’t a good one. I trust my instincts and I have bad feelings about Romney, which are backed up by all supporting evidence. And there is a wealth of it. He’s a charlatan and I will not support him. I’d rather stake my confidence in electing a conservative congress that will block activist appointments by whoever wins.
So save the condescension and feigned worry for my children. You knock yourself out and pat yourself on the back telling yourself how much more reasonable you are than us radical ideologues, because you’re willing to compromise your values (assuming you share them) by promoting candidates that can ‘win’ even though they will continue to push a progressive agenda that will destroy the country. My conscience is quite clear. Thanks.
Exactly!
pannw on November 2, 2011 at 4:47 PM
This is the biggest bunch of big “R” Republicans I have ever seen. These candidates haven’t even given you a plan to ballance the deficit within 10 years and you are still excited about them.
Ron Paul is the only one that has given a plan to ballance the deficit in 1-3 years and you guys are excited about a plan that will tax us the same, but different…
You deserve the government you get! Let your kids pay for the 15 Trillion +.
I’m going back under my rock! And listening to Mike Church on Sirius Patriot.
livermush on November 2, 2011 at 7:47 PM
lovingmyUSA on November 3, 2011 at 4:02 AM
Shoot….
Are you kidding me??? You really wrote that about the man that has run more businesses than Romney, brough back companies from the brink of ruin? Where have you been…on vacation in a cave????
lovingmyUSA on November 3, 2011 at 4:06 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2