NBC/Marist IA poll: Romney 23, Paul 21, Santorum 15
posted at 8:55 am on December 30, 2011 by Ed Morrissey
In the last few days before the Iowa caucus, one would expect the polling to get chaotic and inconsistent, given the nature of caucusing and the interference of the holidays. That’s what makes today’s NBC/Marist poll so intriguing — it’s practically a carbon copy of yesterday’s Rasmussen poll. Both polls have Mitt Romney and Ron Paul at a virtual tie at the top, and Rick Santorum making a big move into third place:
A new NBC-Marist poll confirms that with the caucuses four days away former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney is the frontrunner in Iowa (with Texas Rep. Ron Paul close on his heels), while former Pennsylvania senator Rick Santorum is experiencing a late-in-the-game surge.
Romney and Paul are battling for the top spot, winning the loyalty of 23 percent and 21 percent of likely caucus-goers, respectively. The survey finds Santorum at 15 percent, a jump from 6 percent over the last month. The caucuses are Jan. 3.
At the beginning of the month in this NBC/Marist series, Romney and Paul tied at 19, while Santorum languished at 6% among likely voters. Both sets of numbers included leaners, which only dropped the undecided respondents from 12% to 7%, and boosted Ron Paul more than anyone else (two points to one for both Romney and Santorum). Newt Gingrich has seen his support drop by more than half in the same period, from 28% to 13%, while Rick Perry rose from 10% to 14% to finish just behind Santorum. Michele Bachmann lost a point this month, essentially treading water near the bottom of the pack.
In the second-choice category, Perry finished second to Romney, 21/20, with Santorum in third at 15%. That’s almost double what both Perry and Santorum had at the beginning of the month, but Romney’s second-choice support has grown, too. Most of that came from Herman Cain’s former second-choice support as well as a significant decline for Gingrich, who at 13% still has an edge over Paul’s 9%. That figure seems to indicate that Paul’s support in the caucuses is shallow indeed; he’s gotten all of the support he can muster at this point. Any late breaking decisions by voters will favor Romney, Perry, and Santorum most as voters move away from other candidates.
I think it’s safe to say that NBC/Marist and Rasmussen have a good handle on what the race in Iowa looks like this week. We’ll see what Iowans think by Tuesday. One key Iowan still hasn’t made up his mind, but has begun to say what he can abide, at least — and what he can’t:
Steve King would be warmly welcomed onto any of the campaign buses crisscrossing Iowa in the homestretch before Tuesday’s caucuses, but he spent Thursday at his home in the state’s conservative northwest.
The influential congressman’s position on the sidelines epitomizes the failure of Iowa’s abundant social conservatives to unite behind one candidate who could overtake Mitt Romney, widely distrusted because of his Mormonism and previous support for abortion and gay rights. King expected to settle on a candidate in September or October. He didn’t. …
Erick Erickson, the popular conservative blogger for RedState, mocked Santorum’s rise to third place in the poll, noting the former Pennsylvania senator’s threadbare campaign outside of Iowa. That’s was Mike Huckabee’s problem after Iowa’s social conservatives put him over the top in the 2008 caucuses. “No Surprise, Iowa Social Conservatives Are About to Shoot Us All in the Foot Again,” read the headline on Erickson’s post about the new poll. A Santorum surge, Erickson wrote, means Romney is likely to win the nomination.
That prospect doesn’t bother King, who pointed to Romney’s “exemplary family life” with his wife of 42 years and five sons. “He has more children and fewer vices than I have, so how can I criticize him?” King said, in what could be viewed as an appeal to social conservatives to come to terms with Romney’s likely success. “I could do business with Mitt Romney. I could do business with any of these candidates.”
Actually, there is one candidate whose foreign policy position troubles King far more than Romney’s waffling on abortion. Ron Paul advocates pulling all American troops out of foreign countries as part of a massive military disengagement. “That would be a calamity,” King said. He also worries that a Paul victory in the Iowa caucuses would diminish the state’s status because the quirky libertarian is so unlikely to win the nomination.
I don’t think I ever got a chance to post an interview I conducted with Rep. King before the debate in Des Moines on December 10th, so now seems like a good time to do so. King clearly wants to find a candidate he feels comfortable in endorsing, and his endorsement is probably the one left on the table that could still make some difference, but just as was three weeks ago, King still hasn’t found the right fit.
Related Posts:









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
Unexpectedly!
Washington Nearsider on May 7, 2013 at 10:44 AM
How do you like your dose of Lean Forward, Libyans? Right into the mass grave.
Good job, Preznit Smart Power.
Bishop on May 7, 2013 at 10:45 AM
Whats the difference….h clinton……
crosshugger on May 7, 2013 at 10:47 AM
“This is some rescue. When you came in here, didn’t you have a plan for getting out?” -Average Libya citizen
“He’s the brains, sweetheart!” -Hillary, pointing at Barack
Chris of Rights on May 7, 2013 at 10:49 AM
Well, this is going much better than expected, isn’t it?
hawkeye54 on May 7, 2013 at 10:49 AM
Clearly tea party… Err. LIBYAN tea party.
Gatsu on May 7, 2013 at 10:50 AM
Samantha Powers takes a bow !
Jabberwock on May 7, 2013 at 10:52 AM
One stupid step for Obama…
One giant leap for Jihad.
coldwarrior on May 7, 2013 at 10:54 AM
“Into the garbage chute, no-fly-zone-boy” – (pointing at Barack)
Difficultas_Est_Imperium on May 7, 2013 at 10:54 AM
And once again, we see why a POTUS must have Congress on board when going to war.
Had Congress given its imprimatur, they too would be on the hook for this mess, and would be under pressure to fix it. But, no. Team Liar and President Gutsy Call just had to do it on their own.
And now, the music has stopped, and they are the ones without a chair…
JohnGalt23 on May 7, 2013 at 10:57 AM
I note Ms. Power hasn’t been heard from lately.
R2P = R2FU
PattyJ on May 7, 2013 at 10:58 AM
Because Chaos is Progressive…
Lean Forward!
workingclass artist on May 7, 2013 at 10:59 AM
So this was another war for oil,right?
docflash on May 7, 2013 at 11:04 AM
Are we even sure that that wasn’t the intended consequence?
1) Allow radical muslims to come to power.
2) Be able to blame riots and attacks on a video no one’s seen
3) Get on board the muslim push for a UN treaty that outlaws blasphemy
4) Get rid of the First Amendment, along with the Second etc., which are part of a charter of negative rights anyhow.
rbj on May 7, 2013 at 11:05 AM
Legacy baby
cmsinaz on May 7, 2013 at 11:06 AM
Take heart, Libyans because this situation was brought to you by a dude who won a Nobel Peace Prize, that’s worth something, right?
Bishop on May 7, 2013 at 11:09 AM
Hmmm, looks about right.
hawkeye54 on May 7, 2013 at 11:11 AM
And dear leader went around Congress for this boondoggle didn’t he
cmsinaz on May 7, 2013 at 11:13 AM
I’m sure the Administration will see this as a simple ‘evolution’ in the ‘process of transition’. “Nothing serious, nothing to worry about. Hey! What time do you want to head to the course and do nine holes?”
Liam on May 7, 2013 at 11:13 AM
Which would be true, but this wasn’t a “War” in the traditional sense.
This was probably the worse ‘Covert Action’ ever run by a Administration…
For what?
Was Khadaffi replaced by a more open minded government?
Was any Strategic or National Intelligence gained by this move?
Are we better off now, before this boondoggle was launched?
Talk about a deficit of political capitol.
BlaxPac on May 7, 2013 at 11:13 AM
Libs care not for outcomes, but only for intentions.
Difficultas_Est_Imperium on May 7, 2013 at 11:17 AM
Arab Spring!
myiq2xu on May 7, 2013 at 11:25 AM
Apparently the resignation was withdrawn.
YiZhangZhe on May 7, 2013 at 11:33 AM
A really well done piece:
Difficultas_Est_Imperium on May 7, 2013 at 12:01 PM
What if we hadn’t intervened? Ghaddafi’s tanks would have leveled Benghazi and thousands would have died. There would have followed a period of intense repression and Ghaddafi would have ceased any cooperation with the West. There would be the probability of ongoing conflict and Islamification…another Syria, as rebels fought a diehard regime.
That’s not happening now and there is gratitude in Libya for what we did.
That being said, Obama’s intervention was at the 11th hour, reluctant and short-lived. He let the war go on too long and botched the aftermath. That’s his real legacy.
breffnian on May 7, 2013 at 12:04 PM
I actually disagree with the bolded part above. I actually think Ghaddafi would have done exactly the opposite. He would have attempted to increase his ties with the West as an act of self-preservation.
I think he would have pointed gone to the western nations and said he was fighting their enemies vis-a-vis Ansar al Sharia. He would have asked why we would want to support the rebels, backed by jihadist groups that hate us. He also probably would have said that supporting his regime would provide a bulwark against the Arab Spring spreading further and throwing the entire region into chaos… witness Syria. That once one nation stands up against this regime change, other rebel groups in other nations… Syria, Bahrain, etc… will be less emboldened to begin or continue high profile protests and outright civl war for regime change in their states. I think he probably would have acknowledged privately that he knows we don’t like him, but our choices would be his Libyan state or turning Libya into another Somalia in North Africa.
And it’s certainly looking like we are going to get the latter… Somalia Redux in Libya.
gravityman on May 7, 2013 at 12:47 PM
Al Watan, the MB party, is founded by Bel Hadj, he was the leader of the Libyan Fighting Group, he runs camps for Syrian jihadists in the desert, he brought in Bin Qumu, head of Ansar al Sharia, to train the militants during the war,
narciso on May 7, 2013 at 1:35 PM