Rasmussen poll shows Romney leading 25%, Paul 20%, Gingrich 17%

posted at 12:45 pm on December 21, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

Could the race in Iowa really go to a man who has spent the least amount of time in the state among all of the candidates vying for caucus-goers?  Rasmussen’s latest poll of 750 likely caucus-goers show Romney with a small but statistically significant lead, 25% to 20% for new second-place candidate Ron Paul.  But the big move may be from the second tier:

Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney and Texas Congressman Ron Paul are leading the pack in Iowa with just two weeks to go until Caucus Day. But large numbers of voters remain uncommitted and lots could change between now and January 3.

The new Rasmussen Reports survey of Iowa caucus participants shows Romney on top with 25% of the vote followed by Paul at 20% and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich at 17%. Texas Governor Rick Perry and former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum, both at 10%, are the only other candidates in double-digits.  Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachmann earns six percent (6%), former Utah Governor Jon Huntsman four percent (4%), while one percent (1%) prefer some other candidate and eight percent (8%) are not sure.  …

This poll reflects the highest level of support yet measured for Romney and Paul. It’s also by far the best result yet for Santorum who on Tuesday received an endorsement from Bob Vander Plaats, a major social conservative leader in Iowa. While the Evangelical Christian vote is very divided at this time, Santorum now picks up 19% of it, more than any other candidate. Romney is close behind at 18%.

Among those who say they are certain to participate in the caucus, Romney and Paul are essentially even. As always in a caucus, the organizational effort to get identified supporters to show up on January 3 is likely to determine the outcome.

The organizational edge might go to Paul — but it might not, either.  Even if Romney has not spent much time in Iowa, he has built a significant organization in the state, and he launched a massive ad buy of over $3 million last week.  Furthermore, Romney isn’t having to compete against expectations, so a big finish here might be enough to generate enough momentum to run the table in the early states — especially if Paul ends up being the second-place finisher.  A Gingrich third-place finish would put a serious dent  in his credibility as a candidate.

And it might get worse than that.  Both Perry and Santorum have moved up to 10% in this poll, but Santorum’s support is almost double that of a week ago.  Bachmann has not gotten the same kind of boost, remaining at 6%.  Santorum edges ahead of Perry among Republicans (13% to 11%) and just behind Paul’s 14%, but both trail Romney (27%) and Gingrich (21%).  Paul gets 32% of independents, which is no great shock, and Romney comes in second at 19%, which is also no great shock.  Among those who consider themselves “very conservative,” Santorum comes in third at 19%, almost tying Gingrich and Romney, who get 21% each. Santorum now also comes in third among Tea Party adherents at 17%, just behind Romney at 18% and Gingrich at 23%, and ahead of Paul (14%) and Perry (12%).

As for Paul, this poll shows that his bounce is real, if sometimes overestimated, but he has significant issues in this support.  When asked to pick the weakest candidate to put against Obama, Paul wins with 26% of the respondents, followed by Michele Bachmann at 21% and Gingrich at 16% — a danger sign for Gingrich as well.  (Santorum only gets 4%, but then again, he only gets 4% in the question on which candidate would be strongest, too.)  Gingrich does well in the strongest-candidate question with a second place 25%, but that’s ten points below Romney’s 35%.  Paul only gets 15% on this question, making him the only one of the top three to underperform his support on this question.  If caucus-goers break late on the question of electability — and it’s certainly a trend we’ve seen in the past — then Romney stands the most to gain.

A third-place finish would be a boost to Santorum, who hasn’t ever broken out of the pack, and a big disappointment to Gingrich, who had a big lead in Iowa just a couple of weeks ago.  If Paul falters, Romney will probably get the most benefit, but Santorum could be riding a wave that could crest with perhaps even a second-place finish, if social conservatives in Iowa begin to flock to his banner — and that could have South Carolina Republicans, known for their evangelical social conservatism, taking a new look at Santorum.  We’ll see.


Related Posts:

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 2

Someone is F’ing with Newt bigtime!

ornery_independent on December 21, 2011 at 1:27 PM

That strategy will work very well for Romney.

President McCain used the same strategy; be nice to Obama, don’t go on the offensive, bash conservatives while praising liberals. And it worked wonders, didn’t it?

On the other hand Governors George W. Bush and Ronald Reagan learned a valuable lesson. Never attack the opponent. Don’t attack liberals. And whatever you do do not appeal to your base. That is a recipe for electoral disaster.

angryed on December 21, 2011 at 1:24 PM

You are listening to the professional talkers too much. McCain won because the economy went into freefall in a very scary way and McCain new less about the economy than my dog. It wasnt because he wouldnt say mean things about Obama. Plenty of people were saying those mean things about Obama. The problem was McCain lack of skills, knowledge, and articulation. It wasnt because he didnt act like Rush Limbaugh talking to himself without debate partner behind his golden micropenis…I mean microphone.

Jailbreak on December 21, 2011 at 1:27 PM

If Mormons didn’t believe that the Catholic church was founded by Satan, I would say Romney would win…

The Mormon thing is really holding him back…

MGardner on December 21, 2011 at 1:13 PM

Some individual Mormons (and Evangelicals) may believe that, BUT that isn’t official “Mormon” doctrine.

Soooo, . . . You can say that Romney would win.

Just sayin.

Gunlock Bill on December 21, 2011 at 1:27 PM

angryed on December 21, 2011 at 1:24 PM

McCain didn’t personally attack Barack yes. Ordinarily you also have a record to attack someone on. Barack was unique in this regards because he basically had no record. In the case of Reagan and Bush Ronald Reagan had Carter’s bad economy to run on (twice even, thanks to Walter Mondale being Carter’s VP) and Bush had Clinton’s poor ethical performance in office and Kerry’s terrible military service to go after.

Neither of these cases were personal, they were policy and actual records to attack. McCain just ended up with a short stick because he didn’t have a record to attack Barack with and Obama, really, wasn’t the kind of guy with the personality skeletons in his closet (like, say, Gingrich) that could be attacked either.

Now, though, Obama does have a record that Mitt Romney will probably waste no time in attacking, as he’s done in the debates and in ads. You don’t need to get personal, you just need a record.

WealthofNations on December 21, 2011 at 1:28 PM

Someone is F’ing with Newt bigtime!

ornery_independent on December 21, 2011 at 1:27 PM

If you missed it, c/o newtgingrich.com

ornery_independent on December 21, 2011 at 1:28 PM

Iowa is important until the following day when everyone looks to New Hampshire and then to South Carolina, where historically the real game starts.
Interesting that Rush endorsed Newt- nice, and a big blow to Perry.

jjshaka on December 21, 2011 at 1:28 PM

liberal4life on December 21, 2011 at 1:12 PM

liberal4life is the biggest whack-a-doodle on this site

gerrym51 on December 21, 2011 at 1:29 PM

I am supporting Romney because he is the only candidate who can defeat Obama.

Gingrich would spell electoral disaster.

Move forward to Labor Day 2012. Obama will have the Rose Garden, Gingrich would have the tabloids.

Contrary to the view of some, Romney is NOT John McCain. McCain couldn’t string 3 coherent sentences together, compounded by the fact that he mumbled. Further, McCain WAS Washington. Romney has NEVER worked in Washington, and can run against DC – like Reagan in 1980. Lastly, McCain didn’t want to be president — he just wanted to be the GOP nominee.

Romney is already SOUNDING like a president. Romney will crush Obama in the debates and he is a reliable and safe alternative for millions of disaffected seniors, moderates, soccer moms, and independents. We want this election to be about Obama, not the GOP nominee.

matthew8787 on December 21, 2011 at 1:29 PM

Remember anything short of a win for Romney in Iowa and New Hampshire is a failure. the pressure is on now.

boogaleesnots on December 21, 2011 at 12:56 PM

Outside the fact these states are the traditional kick-off to the silly season, they have no real relevance. Iowa especially which is a caucus. That means all those unemployed Paul supporters with nothing better to do can skew the results. When Paul starts winning real primaries the buzz about his candidacy can begin. But of course that isn’t going to happen. The racist, traitor-loving, idiot is merely a blip.

Happy Nomad on December 21, 2011 at 1:29 PM

Wow… newtgingrich.com now went to http://www.greektravel.com/

ornery_independent on December 21, 2011 at 1:31 PM

I’m voting for Ron Paul! Newt-Romney is a bag of Rinos. Santorum is to strong on social issues and weak on everything else.

This is a once in a generation opportunity to vote for someone that will actually cut gov spending. Cut five dept of gov. That can articulate it so well that a die hard liberal can understand it.

He calls out tax system immoral and want to eliminate it and replace it with gov cuts.
HOW CAN you HATE someone that want YOU to KEEP THE MONEY YOU EARN!!!!

Capitalist75 on December 21, 2011 at 1:31 PM

Bachmann, Perry, and Santorum need to combine into one person. I mean that’s 26% of No-Romney being wasted.

shannon76 on December 21, 2011 at 1:31 PM

Someone is F’ing with Newt bigtime!

ornery_independent on December 21, 2011 at 1:27 PM

As a fan of Newt, this is an outrage.
But pretty funny.

jjshaka on December 21, 2011 at 1:32 PM

Rasmussen poll shows Romney leading 25%, Paul 20%, Gingrich 17%

10%… 6%… (13% to 11%)… 14%… (27%)… (21%)… 32%… 19%… 19%… 21%… 17%… 18%… 23%… (14%)… (12%)… 26%… 21%… 16%… 4%… 4%… 25%… 35%… 15% …

(hold me)

Seven Percent Solution on December 21, 2011 at 1:33 PM

Mormon dirty tricks, no doubt.
Those guys play rough- surprised they didn’t upload Newt on the beach pics.

jjshaka on December 21, 2011 at 1:33 PM

But will Romney go negative against Obama?
portlandon on December 21, 2011 at 12:51 PM

On O’Reilly:

“I consider him a big-government, liberal Democrat. I think, as you look at his policies, you conclude that he thinks Europe got it right and we got it wrong. I think Europe got it wrong. I think Europe is not working in Europe. And I’ll battle him on that day in and day out. But I’m probably not going to be calling him names so much as calling him a failure.”

Today he nailed him on Teddy Roosevelt. He goes after him on a daily basis. But the meme he’s a RINO wuss is just so much more appealing to some of you.

Buy Danish on December 21, 2011 at 1:34 PM

Mormon dirty tricks, no doubt.
Those guys play rough- surprised they didn’t upload Newt on the beach pics.

jjshaka on December 21, 2011 at 1:33 PM

Yeah, because Mormons are the spawn of Satan, right?

Gunlock Bill on December 21, 2011 at 1:35 PM

This is a once in a generation opportunity to vote for someone that will actually cut gov spending. Cut five dept of gov. That can articulate it so well that a die hard liberal can understand it.

Capitalist75 on December 21, 2011 at 1:31 PM

And be the only candidate out of this group (maybe Bachman too) that will lose to Obama.

But, what the heck

RON PAUL/Bachman 2012!!!eleventy!!!

Because our nut is better than their nuts!

cozmo on December 21, 2011 at 1:35 PM

Being eight points back is not insurmountable for Newt, especially in this race. He’s going to start getting tough. For one thing, he needs to emphasize that when he challenged Mitt Romney to a Lincoln-Douglas debate, Romney chickened out.

Reggie1971 on December 21, 2011 at 1:36 PM

For those of you who still think Gingrich is a genius and you think Rick Perry is a dope you might want to check out NewtGingrich.com right about now.

NickDeringer on December 21, 2011 at 1:01 PM

That’s amusing. Good thing the Speaker’s website is Newt.org

Flora Duh on December 21, 2011 at 1:36 PM

Gunlock Bill on December 21, 2011 at 1:35 PM

That was tongue in cheek-
try to keep up, Einstein.

jjshaka on December 21, 2011 at 1:38 PM

Buy Danish on December 21, 2011 at 1:34 PM

Their version of attacks is calling him something incendiary. It doesn’t occur to them that being patently offensive probably doesn’t make you look very presidential and sure as heck won’t win you the presidency.

GOPRanknFile on December 21, 2011 at 1:38 PM

Since we don’t have a real “star” to run against Obama this time, we need to turn the election into a referendum on Obama. To do so, we need a candidate who won’t draw a lot of negative attention to himself and can’t be easily portrayed as scary or extreme.

Based solely on his record, by far the best candidate in the race is Rick Perry. But Perry made a series of critical gaffes that eroded people’s confidence in him. I’m still reeling by what happened to Sarah Palin in 2008 and couldn’t bear to see that happen again in 2012.

Gingrich, Paul, Santorum, and Bachmann are all easily portrayed as being scary or extreme. Gingrich and Paul, in particular, are not shy about taking public positions that are well out of the mainstream of political thought and that can be easily spun as radical or extreme.

So that leaves Romney and Huntsmann. Huntsmann has been a total disaster, so he’s out, leaving Romney as the last man standing.

Do I have this wrong?

Outlander on December 21, 2011 at 1:39 PM

Today he nailed him on Teddy Roosevelt. He goes after him on a daily basis. But the meme he’s a RINO wuss is just so much more appealing to some of you.

Buy Danish on December 21, 2011 at 1:34 PM

Its irnoic isn’t it. They want to believe Romney is soft because is a scion Morman from Massachusetts.

Yet, they whine like babies whenever he beats down an opponent. Now, Romney is being too tough. Oh poor Newt! How dare someone recite facts about his record. How dare someone raise enough money to have the resources to run ads.

swamp_yankee on December 21, 2011 at 1:39 PM

Well if you asked a lot of Protestants back in the day who the Catholic Church was founded by, I’m pretty sure they’d say Satan too.

What I think most people realize is that religions usually evolve with time. Even South Park, which had an entire episode dedicated to pointing out how silly Mormonism was, ended the episode with the Mormon kid verbally schooling Stan about how modern Mormonism places more focus on good relations with your family, friends and community and that, even if it’s a bit nutty, if it asks you to live a good, happy life than there’s nothing wrong with it.

If South Park can even admit that about Mormons, then I don’t think there’s as much a problem with the ‘Mormon thing’ than most people think.

A little nutty???

Mormons believe that the Indians are cursed and that is why their skin is brown…

Lets be honest, if Romney wasn’t Mormon the race would be over…

MGardner on December 21, 2011 at 1:40 PM

Mitt must win Iowa after 1.5mil of his own money and 2.7mil of his superpacs money, and a bus tour.

but he did not play in Iowa because he did not do the straw poll? thats just a weak sauce argument.

boogaleesnots on December 21, 2011 at 1:40 PM

But the meme he’s a RINO wuss is just so much more appealing to some of you.

Buy Danish on December 21, 2011 at 1:34 PM

Just like the meme pushed against Perry about crony capitalism and in state tuition, right. Those are some real nutballs that push false memes…aren’t they.

cozmo on December 21, 2011 at 1:41 PM

MGardner on December 21, 2011 at 1:40 PM

Well most Englishmen believed that Africans were black because the son roasted their skin, drawing the heat to their skin and leaving their insides cold.

Look, everyone was a little nutty a few hundred years ago. That’s just pretty simple fact.

WealthofNations on December 21, 2011 at 1:42 PM

Some individual Mormons (and Evangelicals) may believe that, BUT that isn’t official “Mormon” doctrine.

Soooo, . . . You can say that Romney would win.

Just sayin.

Not true, here it is…

The Catholic church was founded by the devil to lead souls to hell. 14:3

MGardner on December 21, 2011 at 1:43 PM

WealthofNations on December 21, 2011 at 1:42 PM

Sun, not son. I swear, this headache is really distracting.

WealthofNations on December 21, 2011 at 1:44 PM

That was tongue in cheek-

jjshaka on December 21, 2011 at 1:38 PM

Just following your lead.

Gunlock Bill on December 21, 2011 at 1:45 PM

No Gingrich.

Ruiner on December 21, 2011 at 1:46 PM

The only thing we all know is that you have no way of reading everyone’s mind.

There is No way you can prove that assertion.

Chip on December 21, 2011 at 1:19 PM

I can prove it based on what happened the last time Romney ran for president. He was REJECTED by the evangelicals

liberal4life on December 21, 2011 at 1:47 PM

Interesting that Rush endorsed Newt- nice, and a big blow to Perry.

jjshaka on December 21, 2011 at 1:28 PM

Uh no Rush didn’t endorse Newt. He hasn’t endorsed anyone. All Rush has been doing is calling out any untruth that has been reported of all the candidates. I see by the time the actual Iowa caucus takes place, Newt won’t be in the top tier. Neither will Romney or Paul. I actually see Perry and Santorum making an upset win in Iowa. Iowa is only an indicator to SC on who is serious.

Most people though don’t realize that very few will drop out after Iowa. Some will after SC and FL, which will be those with very little money. Texas will probably be a clincher on Apr.3 since that will be a winner take all state. Perry wins at that point.

Ronaldusmax on December 21, 2011 at 1:48 PM

I can prove it based on what happened the last time Romney ran for president. He was REJECTED by the evangelicals

liberal4life on December 21, 2011 at 1:47 PM

Critical analysis isn’t your strong suit, is it?

GOPRanknFile on December 21, 2011 at 1:48 PM

Romney has NEVER worked in Washington, and can run against DC – like Reagan in 1980.

matthew8787 on December 21, 2011 at 1:29 PM

Or Carter in 1976 (how’d that work out). Or Clinton in 1992. Or GWB in 2000. Or Obama (for all intents) in 2008.

My point is this. Reagan was the anomaly when it comes to running as a DC outsider. The fact of the matter is that some inside-the-beltway experience and contacts is not necessarily a bad thing as a President undertakes the process of working with Congress to pass legislation not the least of which is the Federal Budget. The only other option, of course, is the one used by Obama where he just ignores Congress and refuses to get involved other than to stage sham events where he gets up in front of a teleprompter and whines that Congress isn’t rubberstamping his socialist agenda.

I don’t agree with you that Romney is the only electable candidate though I tend to agree with the idea that Gingrich has so much baggage the general election would be a referendum into character instead of Obama’s dismal record of failure after failure. We don’t need to go down that road. Romney’s real problem, and one that he has not been able to address adequately, is the fact that people do not warm to his personality. Enthusiasm of the base will be critical and I (for one) am not going to sit through another election where the GOP candidate is not able to generate excitement. And it isn’t about entertaining the masses but that excitement is necessary to get the kind of grassroots activism necessary for victory in November. GWB managed to generate this kind of support, John McCain never did and many of us voted for the ticket despite the fact a cranky RINO was at the top of the ticket. In McCain’s case it was so bad he had to drag Palin around with him just to get some excitement at his rallies (VP candidates generally campaign on their own to cover more territory in a short period of time).

Bottom line, don’t discount some of the non-Romney candidates just because of their ties to DC. If anybody can’t attack those ties it would be Obama and Biden.

Happy Nomad on December 21, 2011 at 1:49 PM

Iowa is only an indicator to SC on who is serious.

Ronaldusmax on December 21, 2011 at 1:48 PM

Tell that to Mike Huckabee.

WealthofNations on December 21, 2011 at 1:49 PM

Here’s a good link to check your suitability to the candidaye you have chosen…or better yet find out who is most like you!

RedLizard64 on December 21, 2011 at 1:50 PM

Not true, here it is…

The Catholic church was founded by the devil to lead souls to hell. 14:3

MGardner on December 21, 2011 at 1:43 PM

They also believe that men live on the moon.

Here it is, “Men live on the moon” 37:11

Gunlock Bill on December 21, 2011 at 1:51 PM

The ECB made major moves to shore up the banks today, and non-social-cons are freaking out over Santorum possibly making a move in the primary race. Swell.

The housing market was adjusted downward around 15%, and a Mr. Chaban on FBN this morning said it could be 2014 before we see new housing, or any housing growth. Not to mention the very real fact the commercial real estate bubble has yet to burst, and rain a total economic crap storm upon what is left of America. And people are freaking out over Santorum possibly making any headway in the primary.

The UK is ticking off everyone, and there is chatter it might lose their AAA credit rating along with France who bellied up for only slightly less $moollah$ from the ECB. FYI, France owns about 45% of the Italian bank excrement, and they are not far behind the PIGGS in total on fire status. But social-cons are only obsessed with family values, abortion, and gay marriage, and Rick Santorum, well he NEVER thinks of stuff like the eurozone being totally toast! There is no way a social-con candidate could possibly fathom the importance of Europe being on fire because he is hiding in people’s houses with video cameras, and is obsessed with the gay lifestyle. Right.

China is wanting to get their military groove thing on with the world, or more specifically us, and we are gutting our military. The Iranian Proxy is making large pinching moves on Israel, and recently the Israelis told Syria they will be happy to do away with them if they do not behave. Meanwhile, Pooty-Poot-Poot-Putin, who so rejected the reset button, he is building a swell alternative to OPEC, by creating a Russian OPEC that will be fueling Europe. Uhm, sort of what Reagan said we DID NOT want to happen when it came to pipelines running from say Russia to Germany. But social-cons, well we morons are just so idiotic as to never, ever consider these troubling factors because we want to form religious, brown shirt types to enforce all those going to church mandates, and laws previous social-con presidents created.

And let us not overlook the million or so current laws on the books that a Democrat Congress, and POTUS have foisted upon the American people. You know those things like Obamacare, the out of control EPA, DOJ, DHS, NEA, etc., etc. Oh yeah, we have less to fear from THOSE guys than anyone like Rick Santorum. Santorum represents the SS, and the Democrats in Washington are really more like the Allies fighting for freedoms. I mean, the current overlords are all so down for freedom, just look at OWS, and all that freedom they support versus say, the Tea Party, and how the Tea Partiers were viewed by the current Administration. There is no way Rick Santorum, or another social-con candidate would ever come close to being as freedom loving, and fair minded as this Administration in how they view Americans who are non-unioned workers, and capitalists. We social-cons are such narrow minded voters, single issue driven, and are so obsessed with gays to the point that we have no concept of how dangerous OWS, and their supporters are in regards to the country.

For you atheist, non-social-cons, and all others who do not see yourselves as Evangelicals, or in the social-con crowd, here is the deal, we social-cons are not necessarily a group that you can throw in one pot. Many social-cons are not single issue voters, and in fact, some of us look at a total picture which a candidate paints over his, or her political, or business career. “Values voters”, or social-cons are a varied group of people who place a high priority on solving the problems we face on economic issues, foreign policy issues, and in addition, we look at a candidate’s moral values. Look at how Huckabee was loathed by many on the social-con side of the aisle. In fact, many a social-con rejected the so called social conservative values of Huckaschmuck because his ECONOMIC, and illegal stances were directly opposed to Conservatism. If social-cons were so obsessed with social values, he may have beaten El Capitain McCain. Look at the AFA supporting Gingrich! Yeah, social-cons are obsessed with purity!

freeus on December 21, 2011 at 1:51 PM

Romney can,t even bring himself to call Obama a socialist.But has no problem calling Newt or any other candidate anything in the book. I can just see the debate now Romney going over to Obama bending down and kissing his A** ah i mean his ring.Romney has said on many occasions he thinks Obama is a nice guy who loves this country.But just has different ideas about the direction this country should go.In other words McCain on steroids.

logman1 on December 21, 2011 at 1:58 PM

Their version of attacks is calling him something incendiary. It doesn’t occur to them that being patently offensive probably doesn’t make you look very presidential and sure as heck won’t win you the presidency.
GOPRanknFile on December 21, 2011 at 1:38 PM

Exactly. They want a Palinesque pit bull which works fine in ginning up the base but it does not win elections. I loved Mitt’s line about Obama being a failure. But he is wise not to engage in name-calling.

Just like the meme pushed against Perry about crony capitalism and in state tuition, right. Those are some real nutballs that push false memes…aren’t they.
cozmo on December 21, 2011 at 1:41 PM

Every single one of your inane comments uses the word “nutball”. I have this image of you as a parrot standing on your perch, saying, Nutball. Nutball. Nutball. You called me “xenophobic” but have yet to provide a single word of evidence to back up this asinine allegation. You have nothing to add to any discussion.

Buy Danish on December 21, 2011 at 1:58 PM

The Wall Street Journal (Rupert Murdoch) is no friend of the real Tea Party masses (that aren’t affiliated with the Forbes/Dick Armey type groups).

The WSJ wants the same Federal Sow to be available for their cronies to suck off the teats of in 2013. They just don’t want GE on the teat. They want THEIR FRIENDS and CRONYS on it.

Ugggghhhh, The Ruling Class.

PappyD61 on December 21, 2011 at 1:59 PM

Perry supporters are legion and are ready to strike. Get off the runway Willard because your shake, rattle and roll is is as decrepit as your 1950s brylcreem hairdo. Hugh Hewitt can’t shovel enough bullfeathers to save your bid at this point. Perrychadnezzar is comin’ for ya Willard, the writing is on the wall. Gnash your teeth and wail for the second round of millions you squandered to feed your powerlust.

Perry 2012

Spirit Crusher on December 21, 2011 at 2:00 PM

Romney can,t even bring himself to call Obama a socialist.But has no problem calling Newt or any other candidate anything in the book. I can just see the debate now Romney going over to Obama bending down and kissing his A** ah i mean his ring.Romney has said on many occasions he thinks Obama is a nice guy who loves this country.But just has different ideas about the direction this country should go.In other words McCain on steroids.

logman1 on December 21, 2011 at 1:58 PM

What has he called the other candidates that’s worse than calling Obama “a failure”?

GOPRanknFile on December 21, 2011 at 2:01 PM

I can prove it based on what happened the last time Romney ran for president. He was REJECTED by the evangelicals

liberal4life on December 21, 2011 at 1:47 PM

Vapid comments like this drive me crazy. What exactly is an evangelical? Liberals use the term to describe any person of faith who actually practices it (unlike the baby-killing Catholics that populate their ranks). They also use the term as a perjorative except for instances like above when they want to make the claim that Romney was rejected because he is a Mormon. In other words, liberal4life wants to get the GOP engaged in warfare over religious beliefs. It is about as underhanded, dishonest, and reprehensible tactic as you can get.

First off, evangelical means different things depending on the context. Romney was not rejected by evangelicals though there was plenty of discussion (fomented by the left) about religion but no real proof that Romney lost because of his faith. The reality is that the whole primary process was a set up for social conservatives. McCain won primary after primary because the social conservative vote was split between other candidates.

Secondly, whatever conditions dictated the 2008 election results are not necessarily the reality in 2012. Thanks to the election of an incomptent America-hating European socialist like Obama; the nation is in a far more miserable state of being with unacceptably high unemployment and national debt. Not to mention a declining quality of life. It is those conditions and who can best clean up the mess that Obama has made that will be the focus of this election. I’d be surprised if the faith issue even comes up. After all, since January 2009 we’ve been led by a faux Christian that spent more than 20 years in a racist church that preaches hatred toward whites and Jews. I welcome the comparison of Mormanism to the kind of faith practiced by Obama.

Happy Nomad on December 21, 2011 at 2:01 PM

Paul is in first Newt 2nd and Mitt in a way back 3rd place in latest poll!!

davemason2k on December 21, 2011 at 2:02 PM

The new Rasmussen Reports survey of Iowa caucus participants shows Romney on top with 25% of the vote followed by Paul at 20% and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich at 17%. Texas Governor Rick Perry and former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum, both at 10%, are the only other candidates in double-digits

Punchenko and I are guardedly ecstatic.

Basilsbest on December 21, 2011 at 2:03 PM

Just thought I’d point out that a new poll shows that nearly half of voters think nobody running for president would do a good job. Now some of that is going to be liberals that would answer that way regardless how well conservatives were doing, but some of that isn’t.

At this point, all this ugly infighting is damaging our prospects for beating Obama. So at this point I’d like Romney to win Iowa just to settle this race some and get it over with. I know he’s not as conservative as some people would like, but if its Romney or Obama I’ll take Romney in a heart-beat; and it increasingly appears that this is indeed the case.

PS

Seeing way too many little many bits and pieces of anti-Mormon rhetoric in these comments. I know I don’t have any authority or anything, but that sort of crap is just way too ugly. Besides that, they’re a not insignificant demographic that overwhelmingly votes Republican. So maybe it isn’t a good idea to antagonize them.

Just saying.

WolvenOne on December 21, 2011 at 2:08 PM

Tell that to Mike Huckabee.

WealthofNations on December 21, 2011 at 1:49 PM

You’d think he’d be the first person to be talking about how pointless Iowa is.

TXGOP on December 21, 2011 at 2:08 PM

lol… Iowans aint voting for no Mormon.

liberal4life on December 21, 2011 at 12:56 PM

Bigot.

rubberneck on December 21, 2011 at 1:26 PM
If you feed trolls, they keep coming back. If you don’t, they eventually go away.

angryed on December 21, 2011 at 1:27 PM

___________________________________________________________________

Me…..I thought you fed him his lunch yesterday!
(:>)

KOOLAID2 on December 21, 2011 at 2:14 PM

Going negative seems to work.
But will Romney go negative against Obama?
portlandon on December 21, 2011 at 12:51 PM

Oh right, the ardent capitalist who, for the last 4 years, has poured his energy, his ego, his heart and his money into running for the presidency is going to go soft on that commie ba$tard who is destroying the country.

Will Romney go negative against Obama? It may be a blatantly stupid question, but because it’s Romney feel free to ask it a million times. Romney will go negative against Obama’s pathetic record. Romney is too smart to do what a lot of you here want. He won’t make it personal. He wants to be President. He won’t settle for a pyrrhic victory for the emotional satisfaction of venting. He’s too smart and too discipled. He will make a great President.

Basilsbest on December 21, 2011 at 2:17 PM

Of course Romney will go negative on Obama. The man gets down and dirty with the best of them when desperate. Just ask Newton. The problem with Romney is that if he wins the general election he’ll likely abandon the tea party conservatives because he doesn’t share a similar ideological outlook. Willard is the choice of a backwards moving kind of political movement. The kind of where the base is ignored, mocked and scorned after the votes are counted.

Spirit Crusher on December 21, 2011 at 2:24 PM

Amen to basilsbest’s comments — and Romney is ALREADY sounding like a president — unlike the current occupant at 1600 Penn

matthew8787 on December 21, 2011 at 2:24 PM

Basilsbest on December 21, 2011 at 2:17 PM

Isn’t it funny that one of the biggest knocks against him is that he’s overly ambitious…that he’ll do whatever it takes to win, but some people think that all of a sudden he’ll play nice if he actually gets the nomination? Lol maybe they think that all he cares about is winning the nomination but doesn’t really want to become President?

GOPRanknFile on December 21, 2011 at 2:25 PM

Lol now that Newt site goes to the Freddie Mac home page

La Troienne on December 21, 2011 at 2:25 PM

Spirit, you are mistaken. Every president needs his base. Romney is well aware of conservative suspicion and will react accordingly. Romney will WANT to be a two-term president. He will take great care with judicial appointments and do everything possible to defund, unravel and repeal Obamacare. Just for starters.

matthew8787 on December 21, 2011 at 2:26 PM

Romneybots spinning for Romney. Per usual.

Flapjackmaka on December 21, 2011 at 2:27 PM

PPP’s newest poll is out: Romney leads Obama in a head-to-head matchup for the first time. 47%-45%.

And 88% of Republicans say they’ll support Romney, as compared to only 83% of Democrats for Obama. THAT is what it means to 1.) have crossover appeal; 2.) to have locked up your base.

The moral of the story is that the ne’er-do-wells like Punchenko et al. here on Hot Air represent pretty much nobody except themselves.

Romney’s gonna be the nominee, and he’s going to beat Obama.

Esoteric on December 21, 2011 at 2:30 PM

Rush just implied that Santorum is his pick. He said that we would be able to trust what he says every day.

Decoski on December 21, 2011 at 2:31 PM

Lets face it, the majority of voters in Iowa are idiots.

They gave a win to Obama

and now they want to give a win to Obama lite (Romney)

or the guy that is literally crazy as loon, Ron Paul.

georgealbert on December 21, 2011 at 2:37 PM

Texas will probably be a clincher on Apr.3 since that will be a winner take all state. Perry wins at that point.

Ronaldusmax on December 21, 2011 at 1:48 PM

lol. Yes, Perry just needs to lay low until Texas votes. Great plan! (Never mind that he trails Ron Paul in Texas, and Perry will drop out after losing the first three states)

hanzblinx on December 21, 2011 at 2:38 PM

Lets face it, the majority of voters in Iowa are idiots.

georgealbert on December 21, 2011 at 2:37 PM

Sometimes the truth is hiding in plain sight.

Spirit Crusher on December 21, 2011 at 2:39 PM

Voters in Iowa are starting to realize Mitt is the best candidate we have running today. He is conservative, moreso than Bush was in 2000, he is experienced and he is Obama’s worst nightmare for the upcoming election. Go Mitt go!

timbok on December 21, 2011 at 1:07 PM

All true. But what Coulter said is true, voters want a candidate who will call Obama a Kenyan/Marxist/America hater. They don’t realize that kind of candidate is unelectable, or maybe they just don’t care.

Go RBNY on December 21, 2011 at 2:44 PM

Lol now that Newt site goes to the Freddie Mac home page

La Troienne on December 21, 2011 at 2:25 PM

The group who bought http://NewtGingrich.com is American Bridge SuperPAC, founded by David”Media Matters”Brock.

Dem PAC hits Gingrich with website prank

American Bridge 21st Century, a Democratic political action committee, took credit for the prank, and for buying the domain name, on Craigslist, where they asked for $1 million — or best offer — to sell the name.

Flora Duh on December 21, 2011 at 2:45 PM

georgealbert on December 21, 2011 at 2:37 PM

I wonder if you thought the same when Newt was up in Iowa.

GOPRanknFile on December 21, 2011 at 2:48 PM

Basilsbest on December 21, 2011 at 2:17 PM

Isn’t it funny that one of the biggest knocks against him is that he’s overly ambitious…that he’ll do whatever it takes to win, but some people think that all of a sudden he’ll play nice if he actually gets the nomination? Lol maybe they think that all he cares about is winning the nomination but doesn’t really want to become President?
GOPRanknFile on December 21, 2011 at 2:25 PM

Good comment but I wouldn’t call what the ABRs do thinking. These people are beyond stupid and deserve Obama. They are incapable of thinking strategically. They carry on like screeching teeny boppers. I’m hoping we don’t get the government they deserve.

Basilsbest on December 21, 2011 at 3:09 PM

Rick Santorum is going to surprise some folks. I like him, his beliefs match my own, and I want someone who wants to serve, and not be served. He is an honest man in a dishonest business.

Remember the two rules of politics:

1. In politics, the ARE NO RULES!
2. When in doubt, FOLLOW the MONEY!

MJScanlonOH on December 21, 2011 at 3:56 PM

American Bridge 21st Century, a Democratic political action committee, took credit for the prank, and for buying the domain name, on Craigslist, where they asked for $1 million — or best offer — to sell the name.
Flora Duh on December 21, 2011 at 2:45 PM

Sounds like they have money to burn. But pay no heed, it’s Mitt Romney’s work for Bain Capital that’s the problem, not the bloated accounts of the sniveling Democrat fat cats.

Buy Danish on December 21, 2011 at 4:12 PM

If Republicans in Iowa are so stupid that give Perry , a successful 3 terms governor of giagantic state, same rating as a one term senator loser, Santurom, then they deserve to have Romney as nominee, another loser, who will lose in general election.

nancysabet on December 21, 2011 at 4:44 PM

Bonjour et au revoir Mitt Ronmey.

hotairhead on December 21, 2011 at 4:45 PM

The only poll that matters is the one the Iowa caucus-goers will be making when they cast their votes on Jan. 3rd. A lot can happen in the next 13 days. Polls will go up and down and will vary according to who conducted the poll and internals of their sample. Just remember folks: the main objective is to kick Obama out of the White House. Let’s get it done.

jfs756 on December 21, 2011 at 4:48 PM

Bonjour et au revoir Mitt Ronmey.
hotairhead on December 21, 2011 at 4:45 PM

Romney, my bad.

hotairhead on December 21, 2011 at 4:55 PM

Will Romney go negative against Obama? It may be a blatantly stupid question, but because it’s Romney feel free to ask it a million times. Romney will go negative against Obama’s pathetic record. Romney is too smart to do what a lot of you here want. He won’t make it personal. He wants to be President. He won’t settle for a pyrrhic victory for the emotional satisfaction of venting. He’s too smart and too discipled. He will make a great President.

Basilsbest on December 21, 2011 at 2:17 PM

Agree with that 100%. You and CDSeven are my favorite commenters on here.

I love watching Trump go after Obama in very harsh and personal terms, but I know that a candidate who does that in a general election campaign will repel as many as he/she attracts (since not everyone is going to react like I do). However, I say let the Romney surrogates, allies and other anti-Obama people go at Obama with everything they have. Let Romney stay above the fray as the candidate.

bluegill on December 21, 2011 at 4:55 PM

Santorum’s first time at 10%. I find this significant. Can’t wait to see the next poll. I’m hoping to call it the “Obama is a Marxist Poll”.

Norky on December 21, 2011 at 4:58 PM

Every single one of your inane comments uses the word “nutball”. I have this image of you as a parrot standing on your perch, saying, Nutball. Nutball. Nutball. You called me “xenophobic” but have yet to provide a single word of evidence to back up this asinine allegation. You have nothing to add to any discussion.

Buy Danish on December 21, 2011 at 1:58 PM

Because you ARE a nutball. Here, you are whining about people not being nice to Romney, while on other threads you attack candidates who aren’t Romney.

I don’t have to prove what you project in other threads. You showed folks yourself.

cozmo on December 21, 2011 at 5:07 PM

Because you ARE a nutball. Here, you are whining about people not being nice to Romney, while on other threads you attack candidates who aren’t Romney.
cozmo on December 21, 2011 at 5:07 PM

Aw, if it isn’t cozmo the clown. I haven’t whined about a damned thing. Didn’t your mommy bring you a hankie yet to wipe away your tears? Maybe she can teach you some common Latin phrases once you’ve stopped whimpering. Honestly, I don’t know how you make it through the day at a political blog without feelings of inadequacy, what with all these common Latin terms like ‘omnibus’ spending bill popping up to make you feel like a “hick”.

Buy Danish on December 21, 2011 at 5:16 PM

I haven’t whined about a damned thing.

Buy Danish on December 21, 2011 at 5:16 PM

But the meme he’s a RINO wuss is just so much more appealing to some of you.

Buy Danish on December 21, 2011 at 1:34 PM

cozmo on December 21, 2011 at 5:20 PM

Here’s a good link to check your suitability to the candidaye you have chosen…or better yet find out who is most like you!

RedLizard64 on December 21, 2011 at 1:50 PM

Yep, Huntsman 2012!

ES

English Springer on December 21, 2011 at 5:39 PM

If Republicans in Iowa are so stupid that give Perry , a successful 3 terms governor of giagantic state, same rating as a one term senator loser, Santurom, then they deserve to have Romney as nominee, another loser, who will lose in general election.

nancysabet on December 21, 2011 at 4:44 PM

Go take another look. He was a 2-term Senator who got crushed in a bad year.

independentvoice on December 21, 2011 at 5:50 PM

The great news is that Newt is no longer the front runner.

Remember, No Newt is good Newt.

Snake307 on December 21, 2011 at 12:59 PM

great line!

bluegill on December 21, 2011 at 5:53 PM

Lol maybe they think that all he cares about is winning the nomination but doesn’t really want to become President?
GOPRanknFile on December 21, 2011 at 2:25 PM

as plagued by contradictions as the anybody-but-Romney crowd is, it wouldn’t surprise me :-)…

jimver on December 21, 2011 at 6:12 PM

Romney’s gonna be the nominee, and he’s going to beat Obama.

Esoteric on December 21, 2011 at 2:30 PM

I think you are right on both points.

CW on December 21, 2011 at 6:19 PM

Romney was great in his Baines defense at the last debate. He talked about overseeing failing business. How failure is part of the beauty and strength of capitalism. I really like him on this.

But then there is ROMNEYCARE.

BoxHead1 on December 21, 2011 at 6:22 PM

Basilsbest on December 21, 2011 at 3:09 PM

Putting the religious bigots aside, a lot of it is about Romney not being overtly nasty. He doesn’t exude anger, the way many feel. It doesn’t mean a thing about his ability to win the general election or to govern. He just doesn’t appeal to that emotion.

People with sense understand that anger is not a strategy. What counts is getting PBHO out of office and turning this country on to the right course. Anger doesn’t appeal to those who don’t feel the hatred that conservatives have for PBHO. In fact, it is completely off putting to everybody else. It’s fine for the base to be angry. We all should be. But ranting and raving is not the way to win and it is not the way to govern.

MJBrutus on December 21, 2011 at 6:31 PM

But then there is ROMNEYCARE.

BoxHead1 on December 21, 2011 at 6:22 PM

Gingrich on Individual Mandate in 2005: ‘I’m in Favor of 300 Million-Payer System’

Partial transcript:

‘If I see somebody who’s earning over $50,000 a year, who has made the calculated decision not to buy health insurance, I’m looking at somebody who is absolutely as irresponsible as anyone who was ever on welfare. Because what they’ve said is, A, I’m gambling that I won’t get sick, and B, I’m gambling that if I do get sick, I can cheat all my neighbors. Now, when you talk to hospitals, a very significant part of their non-collectibles are people who have money, but have calculated it’s not worth the cost to pay. And so I’m actually in favor of finding a way to say, whatever the appropriate level of income is, you ought to have either health insurance, or you ought to post a bond. But we have no right in this society to have a free rider approach, if we’re well off economically, to cheat our neighbors.’

jimver on December 21, 2011 at 6:31 PM

Anger doesn’t appeal to those who don’t feel the hatred that conservatives have for PBHO. In fact, it is completely off putting to everybody else. It’s fine for the base to be angry. We all should be. But ranting and raving is not the way to win and it is not the way to govern.

MJBrutus on December 21, 2011 at 6:31 PM

couldn’t have put it better…

jimver on December 21, 2011 at 6:34 PM

Gingrich on Individual Mandate in 2005: ‘I’m in Favor of 300 Million-Payer System’

Partial
jimver

I agree. It’s too bad those 2 believe that the feds are great at social engineering.

BoxHead1 on December 21, 2011 at 7:23 PM

Putting the religious bigots aside, a lot of it is about Romney not being overtly nasty. He doesn’t exude anger, the way many feel. It doesn’t mean a thing about his ability to win the general election or to govern. He just doesn’t appeal to that emotion.


MJBrutus on December 21, 2011 at 6:31 PM

This is so true. And the other thing I have noticed is that Romney comes off so much better in interviews when the interviewer does very little interrupting and lets Romney calmly, carefully make his case. For example, the OReilly interview with Romney the other night showed a sharp contrast in styles. OReilly was loud and boisterous as usual (which is why he makes for good tv), and Romney stayed calm and measured. The two next to each other made Romney seem shy by comparison, but I think it’s just that Romney’s style isn’t to be a Trump-style loudmouth. Romney is not a screamer or someone who is going to be interuppting constantly. Romney is so much more dignified than that, which is something I want in a president.

bluegill on December 21, 2011 at 7:27 PM

cozmo on December 21, 2011 at 5:20 PM

That’s not “whining”, it’s an observation. Please, for your own sake, stop engaging me – you’re embarrassing yourself.

Buy Danish on December 21, 2011 at 7:27 PM

Not feds - sloppy thinking above. government.

BoxHead1 on December 21, 2011 at 7:29 PM

Ron Paul needs to find something else to do.

the_souse on December 21, 2011 at 7:55 PM

Buy Danish on December 21, 2011 at 7:27 PM

Tomayto tomahto, you are one of the hatin’ nutballs and it will be pointed out.

If you could actually promote your candidate rather than bash the rest, no one would notice.

cozmo on December 21, 2011 at 8:31 PM

We’ll see, but if Romney wins the nomination, I’m voting Libertarian.

GMO on December 21, 2011 at 8:45 PM

Tomayto tomahto, you are one of the hatin’ nutballs and it will be pointed out.
cozmo on December 21, 2011 at 8:31 PM

I don’t “hate” any of the candidates, child. I can’t stand you because (among other things!) you are an insufferable jackass. You want to “point that out”? Where? You have an enemies list or something?

Buy Danish on December 21, 2011 at 10:28 PM

I don’t “hate” any of the candidates, child. I can’t stand you because (among other things!) you are an insufferable jackass. You want to “point that out”? Where? You have an enemies list or something?

Buy Danish on December 21, 2011 at 10:28 PM

That’s okay, I love you. Hatin’ nutballs like you make this place more lively.

cozmo on December 21, 2011 at 10:43 PM

Romney. Paul. Gingrich. Just step back and look at that lineup. Clear your mind of strategery or electability or inside baseball or electoral college counts or Racing Form past performance charts. Romney…Paul…Gingrich. Whiskey Tango Foxtrot! Help us Sarah-wan. You’re our only hope.

curved space on December 22, 2011 at 12:27 PM

I love reading Romney supporters. They are so quick to dismiss his actual record and quote his position of the day. They love to point out polls as though they don’t show 75 to 80% of the electorate against the guy who has been running since 2006. They love to talk electability as though Mittens hasn’t lost 75% of the races he has run and they completely ignore the fact that he couldn’t even launch a credible re-election bid after a single term in the only office he has ever held. I guess they believe that as the field thins and Bauchman, Santorum, Huntsman and Gingrich or Perry (Gingrich hopefully) drop out all their supporters who have literally decided anyone but Obomney are going to suddenly change their minds, decide a rhino with the closet record of anyone in the field to Obama is who they really want, and come running to ol switch hit Mitt. Of course reading these dilusional fools claim that Romney is going to beat Obama is the really pathetic part. Romney has all of Obama’s flaws healthcare, cap and trade, horrible jobs and economic record, history of fee and tax hikes. Pick an issue and Romney has either passed the legislation himself or on video agreeing with Obama’s position. With the added benefit of opening Obama up to attack him on flip flops, outright lies and (tailored made for this election cycle) exporting thousands of good high paying American jobs to Chinese slave factories. The only consolation for conservatives is that these folks are sharing the same fantasy world as paulbots, Romney will never get the nomination thank god.

Perry 2012…. The end of an error!!!!

iidvbii on December 23, 2011 at 3:10 PM

Comment pages: 1 2