Rasmussen Iowa poll: Gingrich falls behind Romney
posted at 9:15 am on December 15, 2011 by Ed Morrissey
A month ago, Rasmussen was one of the first pollsters to pick up on Newt Gingrich’s momentum, showing him up 13 points over Mitt Romney in Iowa, 32/19. If Rasmussen has its finger on the pulse of Iowa voters, that momentum didn’t last long. Today’s Rasmussen poll shows Gingrich losing twelve points since November 15th and falling behind Romney for second place, at 23/20:
Take a look at the stability in Romney’s numbers — and the instability in almost everyone else’s. Scott Rasmussen points this out in the video. The only other candidate who’s had any stability at anything above the signal-noise level is … Ron Paul, who’s back to about where he was in August before Rick Perry and Herman Cain had their bubble moments.
The internals show some interesting points. Gingrich captures 27% of “very conservative” respondents, but Romney gets 17%, good for second place. Romney wins the “somewhat conservative” demo by ten points at 29/19 over Gingrich, and not surprisingly, the “other” category at 22%. Paul comes in second rather than third in this last demo at 19%. Rick Perry ties for third place at 14% among very conservative respondents, falls well back to fourth place at 10% in the intermediate group, and drops to 6% among “others.” If Perry wants to get enough of a bounce to compete in two weeks, he needs to either start grabbing a lot more of Gingrich’s “very conservative” support or look for ways to attract the “somewhats.”
Here’s an interesting note from the internals. For all of the class-warfare bombs being tossed by both Gingrich and Romney, Romney beats Gingrich in every income demographic in Iowa except the $75-100K group. Paul, though, beats both in the under-$20K and $60-75K demos.
Romney also leads among people who have made up their minds, 29% to 22% for both Gingrich and Paul, but he also slightly leads those who could change their mind, too — 22/21 over Gingrich, with Paul third at 17%. Perry only gets 7% while he has 14% among those who could change their minds, which means that he is just beginning to convince people to rethink his candidacy. Time is definitely running out for Perry, in other words. Among those certain to show up at the caucuses, Romney’s lead expands to 25/21 with Paul dropping to 17%, and Romney even leads among those not certain to show up, 20/18/18.
It looks like Gingrich has a momentum problem in Iowa. If he can’t close the deal here, can he remain viable in South Carolina and Florida? It’s possible, but given his large polling advantage just days earlier, I’d be a little skeptical. This looks like a re-evaluation based on the heightened scrutiny of Gingrich’s record, and it seems that voters may be having second thoughts.
Related Posts:
Blowback
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
I’m with Ann Coulter on this one – I’d sooner vote for Jeffrey Dahmer than Obama. It really doesn’t matter who the Republican nominee is. He or she has my vote. I can only hope he behaves like a true conservative once in office.
Patton531 on December 15, 2011 at 1:00 PM
I seem to have missed all of the media efforts to support Newt as the Republican nominee. Can you please link to a few of them?
Thanks.
GaltBlvnAtty on December 15, 2011 at 1:03 PM
prediction:
Herman Huntsman continues his serge from 2 to 5 to 6 by New Year
blogFog on December 15, 2011 at 1:04 PM
If that is the case, I hope my tears are as delicious! ;-)
csdeven on December 15, 2011 at 1:06 PM
surge
blogFog on December 15, 2011 at 1:07 PM
You are a true patriot!
csdeven on December 15, 2011 at 1:08 PM
Oh my! And Gingrich hasn’t even had a major gaffe.
The very fact that the rinos and republican elite along with
various pundits are coming out against Newt Gingrich makes me
want to vote for him all the more!
Amjean on December 15, 2011 at 1:17 PM
November 15th 2011
Rasmussen poll showing Newt leading Iowa with 12%
PPP Poll showing almost the same thing
True conservative comments was something like,
*Yeah proof everybody hates Romney,
*Rasmussen was right on the money last election
*Even a democratic polling firm can have it right sometimes
*Romney is over, Newt is unstoppable
*Finally Rasmussen nails Romney!!!
*The establishment is wetting their pants
December 15 2011
Rasmussen poll showing Romney ahead of Gingrich
PPP Poll showing Gingrich losing heavy ground
“True conservative commentators”
*PPP is full of !@#$
*Rasmussen IS the establishment
*Rasmussen plays games with the conservative movement
*I hate the establishment (what it has with this poll is beyond me)
* Rasmussen got the check in the mail from the Romney camp
*I am sick of “insiders” picking the candidate for us
*The betters have spoken
So the same group of commentators who have problems with Romney’s position changing, have flipped and flopped and will probably flip a few more times until this thing is over
Every sane person who has followed politics knows that when someone goes in one week from 8% to 33% in Iowa, or from 12% to 47% in Florida, that it is a huge bubble, and when it crashes it goes right down where it was from the beginning (or even lower)
But not to spoil the spirit here, remember one thing, whenever Romney does something we don’t like as president, or he loses the election against Obama, the real reason was/is RASMUSSEN
Not the conservative movement who couldn’t figure out a candidate they can unite under, and couldn’t even convince any strong conservative to run, NO, its RASMUSSEN
OrthodoxJew on December 15, 2011 at 1:18 PM
Good luck with that one
blogFog on December 15, 2011 at 1:23 PM
csdeven is a good guy, very misunderstood here, because he’s easily tempted to enter the fray.
Schadenfreude on December 15, 2011 at 1:25 PM
Mittens vs Uhbamuh Debate:
Mittens: Why didn’t you call me about Obamacare?
Uhbamuh: *laughs*
Mittens: *cries*
The End.
Sam Widge on December 15, 2011 at 1:29 PM
Oh, no, please don’t misunderstand. As I’ve said many times, and as csdevin already knows, I’m a fan of csdevin, and willing to fight the natural obsession :)
Exhausting.
Axe on December 15, 2011 at 1:42 PM
Did you guys see this:
“Newsmax/InsiderAdvantage Poll: Romney in Free Fall”
According to THIS poll, exactly the opposite of what Rasmussen says is happening is happening. While Rasmussen has Romney surging to the lead with 23, Newsmax has him in complete collapse to 12.
So what do you believe?
Well, Newsmax is confirmed by 5 other polls while the Rasmussen poll is confirmed by, well, no one.
THE TAKE-AWAY:
Can we please stop hyper-ventillating about every new poll that comes out? They are clearly all over the map and meaningless.
mitchellvii on December 15, 2011 at 1:45 PM
… the real hyperventilating is over in the Ron Paul thread. I thought it was just a slow news day, but I was wrong. Again.
Axe on December 15, 2011 at 1:49 PM
this
and if a RINO does win, what does that mean for 2016, more infighting?
perhaps we should just tread water for 4 more and watch the veto orgy
blogFog on December 15, 2011 at 1:49 PM
I’m not merely anti-Romney. I believe that the obliteration of Mitt Romney and every vestige of his meaning and style is essential to the survival of the Republican Party. It is an existential imperative.
Ronald Reagan’s indifference to his structural legacy was tragic. He was ignorant and/or inattentive on two conjoined political fronts – political corruption and RINOism. He not only did not purge and re-create the Republican infrastructure in his image when he had the chance, but was blind to the corrosive tenacity of RINOism. Choosing George Bush as vice president may have made political sense at the time (arguable), but it guaranteed the swift end of “Reaganism” as anything but a subject for rousing speeches and sweet nostalgia.
rrpjr on December 15, 2011 at 1:52 PM
you can’t be taking seriously a Newsmax poll? :-)…Rasmussen is a polling agency, Newsmax polls its… 4 readers :-)…
jimver on December 15, 2011 at 1:53 PM
I mean, state polling (and especially caucus state polling) is notoriously unreliable. However I have never seen polls this far all over the map.
I mean in one poll Newt leads Romney by 15 and in another taken at the same time he trails Romney by 3? Really, an 18 point swing?
Couple BIG reasons I have a hard time believing Romney is surging in Iowa and Rasmussen claims:
1) Iowa is very evangelical and evangelicals don’t dig the whole Morman bit.
2) Romney has pretty much ignored Iowa until recently.
3) Romney is going negative BIG TIME and they HATE that in Iowa.
Add to the fact that no other poll has confirmed the Ramsussen Poll and I have to declare it an outlier.
mitchellvii on December 15, 2011 at 1:56 PM
I believe the Newsmax sample was as large or bigger than Rasmussen’s. Also, no other poll has confirmed Rasmussen while 6 polls now have confirmed Newsmax.
So yeah, I can take it seriously.
mitchellvii on December 15, 2011 at 1:58 PM
Also, a model.
Axe on December 15, 2011 at 1:59 PM
‘corrosive RINOism’, ‘purge the Republican infrastructure’ :-) – arrgh, the purists strike again…maybe you should start your own party :-), the RINO-ism of GOP is what keeps it in business, otherwise it would be a fringe party of loons, doomed to sit on the fence and never govern…flash news: this country is at best a center right one, more likely a center one, so yeah, I’m quite comfortable with the RINO-ism of the GOP…
jimver on December 15, 2011 at 2:03 PM
Someone here wants to obliterate Mitt Romney.
True Conservatives are such nice, inclusive people.
Evidence at HA suggest they actually are sanctimonious, intolerant, impractical, and hypocritical. And, in far too many cases, out-and-out bigots.
Teh Mormons and teh gays–hey, let’s obliterate them, too!
The disconnect between the dreaded (and supposedly stupid) establishment and the TCs is that the Republican Party wants to beat Obama. The True Conservatives don’t care about that. They also prefered Chris Coons to Mike Castle, and would rather see Elizabeth Warren win than Scott Brown.
So, if it comes down to Barry v. Mitt, they’re fine with Barry. And his EOs, SCOTUS appointments, and kill capitalism policies.
Really–it’s the “establishment” who is stupid???
Meredith on December 15, 2011 at 2:15 PM
All the volatility reflects poorly on the Republican voters. Of course the continual flip-flopping of the voters is because of the poor field of candidates. I am disgusted with myself for moving my support from one to another to another candidate. I think I am reduced to what was initially my worst option: Romney. Like Patton531 said, any one will do that can beat Obama.
bremsstrahlung on December 15, 2011 at 2:23 PM
when you like a poll its accurate
when you don’t like a poll its an outlier
Who knew?
gerry-moderate republican-mittbot
gerrym51 on December 15, 2011 at 2:24 PM
daily gallup trackng poll
Gingrich 29 Romney 24
8 days ago
Gingrich 37 Romney 21
oops.
gerrym51 on December 15, 2011 at 2:26 PM
Like there’s a difference? :-D
Aitch748 on December 15, 2011 at 2:26 PM
Gerry, I have to tell you–you’re status updates at the bottom of your posts are probably my favorite result of the open registration. We may not agree on Mitt, but you are a keeper.
Kataklysmic on December 15, 2011 at 2:28 PM
thanks,
I hope Ed doesn’t ban me.
gerrym51 on December 15, 2011 at 2:36 PM
Not the kind of thing you get banned for.
Axe on December 15, 2011 at 2:38 PM
The fact that Newt has come back a bit is unsurprising. The fact that he is still above 20% given the public acid enema he has been given by right-wing bloggers is truly miraculous.
In other words, they’ve shot their biggest guns and THIS is the best they can do?
Romney is in trouble.
mitchellvii on December 15, 2011 at 2:38 PM
Hahaha. gerry, based on your posts so far, you have about as much chance of being banned as Tina Korbe does.
Kataklysmic on December 15, 2011 at 2:43 PM
Evidently you haven’t noticed it’s going out of business. Since the days of landslides driven by the articulated deconstruction of liberalism under Reagan, what have we seen? If we are a “center” or “center-right” country how is it even conceivable a Republican would lose to a Marxist? The political and moral bankruptcy of RINOism is how. Purity? I don’t know what that means. I do know however what Romney means — the end of any chance of a vital or virile challenge to cultural and political dominion of the Left.
rrpjr on December 15, 2011 at 2:49 PM
Something else that has to be considered is the way the GOP primary is structured now. The party has changed since the last cycle to be more like the Democrats (inexplicably, given that the Democrats primary structure almost destroyed their party four years ago).
Winning doesn’t necessarily matter the way it used to in the GOP, because the delegates are split proportionately. (Or rather, winning is everything right up until the Iowa caucus ends, then the paroxysms of our ADD media will convulse right over to the delegate race.) Mitt and Newt are almost certain to be 1-2 or 2-1 coming out of New Hampshire in delegates. From there we move to South Carolina and Florida.
HitNRun on December 15, 2011 at 2:55 PM
were still working on it.
Gerry-moderate republican-mittbot-working hard to exasperate Ed.
gerrym51 on December 15, 2011 at 3:11 PM
Hear, hear! He actually considers the merits of a candidate rather than tallying up how many check boxes he can put next to their name on the offical conservative score card.
He goes off the rails some times when he responds to every idiot with the inclination to throw table scraps, but we’ve all gotten caught up in that game a few too many times.
MJBrutus on December 15, 2011 at 3:53 PM
I never understood this “center right” thing. After all, isn’t the very definition of center: that place where half are to the right and half to the left? So how can the country’s center be to one side of the country’s center?
MJBrutus on December 15, 2011 at 3:57 PM
Thank you for speaking truth friend.
apocalypse on December 15, 2011 at 4:18 PM
…salute
apocalypse on December 15, 2011 at 4:20 PM
Most of the GOP sees what you doing as falling for the dems strategery to get Obama reelected by trying to change the leadership in the GOP too quickly. If we nominate a candidate that the indies will not support, we hand Obama the election on a silver platter. It’s wiser for us to move in increments toward the nomination of a TEA Party candidate in 2016, if Romney betrays us, or in 2020. In the meanwhile, we load up our local, state, and federal offices with constitutional fiscal conservatives. Palin can help us do that.
csdeven on December 15, 2011 at 4:26 PM
Oh give me a break. By your own idiot logic 80-90% of the base don’t want Perry and 65-70% of the base don’t want Newt either.
haner on December 15, 2011 at 4:36 PM
Really?
Wow.
Though I guess that does help explain away a little the GOP primary field.
verbaluce on December 15, 2011 at 5:05 PM
As is the method of many on Hot Air, you paint with too broad a brush.
I consider myself a true conservative. I voted for Romney in the 2008 primary. I have never cared about Romney’s religion, and I still don’t, despite having been accused a couple of nights ago of being a bigot. I am almost certainly likely to vote for whoever wins the Republican nomination, with the only doubt in that regard being Ron Paul. I believe that my position in that regard matches most of the commenters who do not support Romney.
I don’t consider the Republican establishment to be stupid. In fact, they are very smart, clever, and well-schooled on how to remain entrenched in power and in how to destroy the character of every single candidate who presents any threat to their comfortable positions. I do not think that the Republican establishment cares much for conservatism.
GaltBlvnAtty on December 15, 2011 at 5:23 PM
And so you’re going to go with Newt?! Cognitive dissonance is real.
haner on December 15, 2011 at 5:26 PM
Ironic the poll says “New Gingrich”
azstrat on December 15, 2011 at 5:30 PM
Big tall handsome guy, pretty wife.
Vs an ugly old newt and his plasticene playmate.
Wonder what is affecting the polls?
PaleoRider on December 15, 2011 at 5:32 PM
You know, you guys should just create your own party and get it over with. No one is telling you who the alternative to Obama is, you have your free will to vote for whoever you want. But don’t whine and b*tch about democracy when the votes don’t turn out to be in your favor.
You True Conservatives’ judgment from Bachmann, to Perry, to Cain and now Newt has been been found wanting. With a track record like that, I’m beginning to doubt other areas of your judgment.
haner on December 15, 2011 at 5:42 PM
Rather, your cognitively subjective view of cognitive dissonance, and my objectively relative choice. As “real” as an imperfect world.
rrpjr on December 15, 2011 at 5:51 PM
The True Conservatives deep down want their very own version of The One candidate. Look how well that has turned out for the Democrats though.
haner on December 15, 2011 at 5:53 PM
+1
The Tea Party loses all credibility backing a guy like Newt. The guy is soft on immigration and corrupt to the core. Fannie Mae is an albatross around Newt’s neck.
haner on December 15, 2011 at 5:57 PM
The picture of Romney and Gingrich should say it all. Look at the facial expression on Gingrich. Those down turned lips aren’t the face of I’m really listening to what you are saying, it is more like how dare you say that about me. Gingrich has never had much if any self control, and it is unlikely that he will be able to maintain his self-discipline in a long and protracted primary, which looks increasingly likely.
Diesel on December 15, 2011 at 6:03 PM
They wanted Mitt, and Newt was the first candidate to really threaten that. It’s exactly how the Democrats reacted to Palin’s selection as VP. It’s amazing people don’t see that.
Look, Paul, Perry, Bachmann, Santorum–they’re a sideshow. Mitt’s ascendance was preordained. Gingrich is the only one who can prevent a Romney nomination. And the “powers that be” are trying to confuse you by saying that Newt isn’t conservative enough, which he’s not, to split your vote among the people who really can’t win. The really sad thing is that it’s working, that cons are actually being convinced to vote their heart instead of their head. That’s all well and good, but it’s going to end up in a Romney win.
alwaysfiredup on December 15, 2011 at 6:27 PM
Rich coming from a Romney guy.
alwaysfiredup on December 15, 2011 at 6:28 PM
I love all you Perry and Gingrich supporters, but Romney has the best chance against Obama. Beating Obama is objective #1. Besides, Gingrich is arguably less conservative than Romney… AND less electable. And Perry… well, let’s just say that he seems like a nice man, but the guy appears totally unprepared and incapable of effective verbal communication, which is kind of an issue. Oh, and Perry is weak on illegal immigration, which, for those of us who have seen the devastation of illegal immigration in border states especially, is pretty much a dealbreaker. I’m also tired of the aw-shucks, slap-the-back clownishness of Huckabee, Bush and to a lesser extent Perry. I was pro-Perry until I saw him in action: not a pretty sight. Not even considering Perry’s politics, it’s obvious the guy is way out of his league and comes across like a “slow leaner with special needs.” I think the formal polish and obvious competence of Romney (and, admittedly, of Gingrich) is a very welcome change. I keep hearing some of you say, “no one is excited about Romney.” Well, you people are apparently living in bubbles or echo chambers. I am excited about Romney. When I watch the debates in groups one of the most common reactions I hear is how impressive Romney is. I hear what you guys (and Rush Limbaugh) are saying about not wanting to “compromise” and about selecting someone who you think is a “true” conservative. Guess what, your “perfect” candidate doesn’t exist or isn’t running! How bet let’s stop living in fantasyland and get down to the business of beating Obama. Romney has taken very fine, conservative positions and has a strong record, whether or not some of you want to hear it.
I will vote for whomever is the Republican nominee, but I hope it is Romney so that we have the best chance. Romney will make an excellent president and I bet many of you Perry people will be singing his praises after his first 4 years in office.
bluegill on December 15, 2011 at 6:59 PM
Lol. You didn’t, I was just teasing, “honey”. Lighten up!
Dang.
kg598301 on December 15, 2011 at 7:39 PM
The same wild and lazy assertion. Prove it. What evidence of Romney’s electoral performances against the Left and what projection of how the race might unfold supports this?
1. His electoral record if 5 for 17. He’s zero for one against the Left, one for two against democrats.
2. He lost to McCain who lost to Obama.
3. His one victory against democrats was narrow, the opponent a non-incumbent no-name, and he didn’t run for re-election.
4. His debate performance record is unremarkable to poor. Ted Kennedy crushed him.
5. He won’t submit himself to hostile settings, and struggles in relatively neutral settings. He’s shown no finesse or grace under pressure in any setting in which he’s pressed.
6. He’s demonstrated poor ability to explain or defend his experiences at Bain Capital or his record of flip-flopping. Indeed, both subjects seem to unnerve him. Kennedy’s ads with interviews of those who’d lost jobs as a result of Bain proved devastating to Romney. The Left will recycle this strategy, and in age of layoffs and media narratives of Wall Street, the result will be worse than 1994 (when the economy was doing relatively well).
7. The Left will run non-stop ads and the media will ask non-stop questions on his shifts and flip-flops. The Left and media will define him as the candidate with fungible principles and compromised positions, i.e., as a congenitally slippery leader. This would not be a critical problem if Romney had EVER demonstrated an understanding of this weakness or an ability to respond or learn from his inability to respond. As the interview with Bret Baier proved, he has not.
8. The Left will run non-stops ads declaiming Romney the “1% candidate,” the “Wall Street candidate” and endlessly feature a photo of Romney with cash spilling out of his pockets.
9. The Left will call out Romneycare as the precursor to Obamacare and use statements and evidence to confirm. This will undercut Romney’s potential appeal to independents and undercut his strength with Republicans who seriously need a candidate adamently opposed to Obamacare and dedicated to its repeal. With Romneycare, Romney is fatally compromised — he can’t make any principled claim and comes off as the worst of both worlds. All he has is words — promises — which are meaningless in light of his record (which the Left will incessantly remind people of).
10. Given the rise and reach of the Left and the specific leftist threats before the country, Romney, an admitted “progressive”, is the least electable candidate in 2012. That is, the least inspiring to conservatives and the least impressive to independents seeking a marked contrast to Obama.
rrpjr on December 15, 2011 at 8:29 PM
All those polls of GOP candidate vs. Obama are completely hypothetic, since none of the candidates has debated Obama 1:1. True, democrats seem to fear Romney most, but I think they underestimate Gingrich in taking on Obama when they go head to head, just like the GOP establishment overestimates Romney, based on simplistic calculations of him being closer to the “centre” (i.e. left) on a 1-dimensional spectrum. In reality, consideration aren’t made on a simple left-right line, but one a more complex manifold, and it would be all too easy for Obama to paint Romney as out-of-touch. Someone who can’t get more than 25% in his own party, and who’s basically surrendered the most effective argumentative weapons (by having been on both sides of so many key issues) does not stand a chance against a president and his friends in the MSM.
I would vote for Romney, but I have friends who say they would seriously stay home, or vote for an independent, even if he has no chance. Obama is weak, the economy is weak, it would be a real shame if we picked an even weaker candidate to actually lose this time.
Captain Obvious on December 15, 2011 at 9:40 PM
And just to add to that: The polls are always GOP candidate vs. Obama, 1:1. If Romney is the nominee, that leaves a wide gap for a conservative running as an independent. Even if that third party candidate has absolutely no chance of winning (and I would not vote for him), such a scenario could give us four more years of Obama. It is much more like when Romney is the nominee compared to Gingrich, which is why choosing Romney is far from a “safe” option.
Captain Obvious on December 15, 2011 at 9:44 PM