Rasmussen: Romney wins a 3-way race with Obama, Paul

posted at 2:01 pm on May 8, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Earlier in this cycle, Republican fretted that Ron Paul could go rogue and run as an independent in the general election, which conventional wisdom held would be a disaster for the GOP.  Paul has (mostly) insisted that he has no intention to make an independent general-election run, but maybe Republicans were too quick to worry.  A new poll from Rasmussen among likely voters show that Romney would win in a three-way match, and Obama would have difficulty hitting 40% of the popular vote (via PJ Tatler):

Texas Congressman Ron Paul appears more interested in influencing the direction of the Republican Party than in running as an independent presidential candidate. But perhaps Democrats should be careful what they wish for: Even if Mitt Romney’s remaining GOP challenger should run as a third party candidate, new Rasmussen Reports surveying finds Romney the winner of a three-way race.

The latest national telephone survey shows that 25% of Likely U.S. Voters think Paul should run as a third party candidate. Sixty-one percent (61%) disagree, but 13% more are not sure. …

Yet despite apparent Democratic hopes that a Paul candidacy might cut into Romney’s total, the likely Republican nominee is the winner of a three-way race if the election were held right now. Given that matchup, Romney earns 44% support to President Obama’s 39%. Paul runs a distant third with 13% of the vote. Two percent (2%) like some other candidate, and another two percent (2%) are undecided.

I doubt that Paul wants to launch an independent bid, too.  He has almost no chance of victory, and such a decision would almost certainly damage the influence of his son Rand in the Republican Party.  The motivations behind this Paul bid are likely to influence the future direction of the GOP, especially on fiscal matters, and to build the Paul organization so that Rand can take over and ride it to a presidential bid of his own.

Still, the Rasmussen results are intriguing.  They tend to corroborate the notion that a third-party run of any significance damages the incumbent rather than the challenger, which is exactly what happened in 1968 (the incumbent party, anyway), 1980, and 1992.  It worked out differently with Ross Perot’s second bid in 1996 for a number of reasons, probably more due to the resurgent economy and the weakness of the Republican ticket.

This poll did oversample Republicans over Democrats, however, with a D/R/I of 36/33/31.  That’s in the ballpark of the 2010 turnout model (35/35/30), but a GOP advantage would be a little surprising (not impossible, though) in 2012.  However, that doesn’t actually come too much into play in the internals.  Paul would get 23% of independents in a 3-way race, but only 5% of Democrats and 11% of Republicans.  More interesting is the fact that Romney gets 10% of Democrats in this poll, while Obama only gets 5% of Republicans.  And while a gender gap does appear between Romney and Obama in this poll, Romney has a 22-point advantage among men in the three-way split over Obama (51/29) while Obama only has a nine-point advantage among women over Romney (47/38).  That gender gap will be something to watch as more polls of likely voters follow.

More than a third of Democrats (34%) want Paul to run as an independent.  They may want to carefully consider the Chinese proverb that warns to be careful when wishing for something, lest one get it.


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 3 4

Oh, look! Paul and Romney are ganging up on Obama just like they did on Santorum!

cavalier973 on May 8, 2012 at 2:03 PM

…oh oh!…here come the trolls!

KOOLAID2 on May 8, 2012 at 2:03 PM

Oh sweet Lord, we get to do this again in a new thread!

dczombie on May 8, 2012 at 2:03 PM

So how is it that Gary Johnson, who is definitely to the left of Ron Paul on several issues (Abortion, Gay Marriage) hurts Romney, but Ron Paul hurts Obama? How does this work?

vegconservative on May 8, 2012 at 2:03 PM

…but what about Gary Johnson or whatever his name is?

KOOLAID2 on May 8, 2012 at 2:03 PM

This one will light up Angryed.

Jabberwock on May 8, 2012 at 2:04 PM

Paul would split the “legalize pot” crowd.

Can we get Ralph Nader to run again?

rbj on May 8, 2012 at 2:05 PM

We should pay Paul to run and I wouldn’t mind the GOP moving more libertarian.

aniptofar on May 8, 2012 at 2:05 PM

…oh oh!…here come the trolls!

KOOLAID2 on May 8, 2012 at 2:03 PM

Battlestations!!!!

portlandon on May 8, 2012 at 2:05 PM

Hmmmm… 13% of the vote.

That puts him within shouting distance of being included in the debates.

I’m not sayin’… I’m just sayin’.

JohnGalt23 on May 8, 2012 at 2:06 PM

There’s something about the thought of a three-way with Ron Paul that makes me queasy…

Bruno Strozek on May 8, 2012 at 2:06 PM

This is the one and only election year I have ever felt so strongly about this:

Ron Paul needs to DROP OUT OF THE ELECTION.

The consequences to our country, and if the paulbots are still thinking “me,” then the consequences to Ron Paul’s chances at anything else from this year forward, as well as his son’s are negligible. And, I really like Rand Paul.

so-notbuyingit on May 8, 2012 at 2:06 PM

How anybody could be so confused or ill informed that their top two picks are the polar extremes of Paul and Obama is… I just don’t know what to say.

Fenris on May 8, 2012 at 2:06 PM

All right, a do over!

cozmo on May 8, 2012 at 2:07 PM

Romney wins a 3-way

THAT’S no way to attract Santorum voters!!

:P

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on May 8, 2012 at 2:08 PM

Poll looks like junk, which puts it in line with Rasmussen’s other results over the last couple years…

AngusMc on May 8, 2012 at 2:08 PM

This poll did oversample Republicans over Democrats, however, with a D/R/I of 36/33/31.

Either that’s actually a 3-point Democratic advantage, or the percentages above are misprinted.

J.S.K. on May 8, 2012 at 2:08 PM

So how is it that Gary Johnson, who is definitely to the left of Ron Paul on several issues (Abortion, Gay Marriage) hurts Romney, but Ron Paul hurts Obama? How does this work?

vegconservative on May 8, 2012 at 2:03 PM

As argued on the other thread on this story, Paul and Obama both draw from younger voters, so that may explain the situation. Also, Obama ran as an “anti-war” candidate in ’08, but didn’t quite govern as such.

In fact, there are probably several areas in the realm of civil liberties that Obama was perceived to be “good” on, but which fell by the wayside in his quest for a single-payer health insurance system. Ron Paul takes up the baton for those issues.

cavalier973 on May 8, 2012 at 2:09 PM

KOOLAID2 on May 8, 2012 at 2:03 PM

Who the what?

BigGator5 on May 8, 2012 at 2:09 PM

He has almost no chance of victory, and such a decision would almost certainly damage the influence of his son Rand in the Republican Party.

The shenanigans Ron Paul is planning for the convention, shows he doesn’t give a damn about damaging Rand’s political career.

Rebar on May 8, 2012 at 2:09 PM

Mitt/Jindal(I KNOW he’s said that we won’t accept but I can still dream)
Mitt/Ryan 2012!…and Go Cruz in Texas!

annoyinglittletwerp on May 8, 2012 at 2:10 PM

I think I would rather not trust this poll and have a head to head competition.

The Count on May 8, 2012 at 2:11 PM

This one will light up Angryed.

Jabberwock on May 8, 2012 at 2:04 PM

I dunno’, he got kicked around pretty hard when this was in the headlines. besser tots tried for a while and now it is down to floating rock to keep the rant going.

cozmo on May 8, 2012 at 2:12 PM

cavalier973 on May 8, 2012 at 2:09 PM

My son will be casting his first vote this fall. He totlerates me but loathes Ronulan.
*That he’s half-Jewish and has a mother who loathes Ronulan I’m sure has nothing to do with it. *wink**

annoyinglittletwerp on May 8, 2012 at 2:12 PM

The shenanigans Ron Paul is planning for the convention, shows he doesn’t give a damn about damaging Rand’s political career.

Rebar on May 8, 2012 at 2:09 PM

Ron Paul beaming his plans for shenanigans into your head again, Retar?

Maybe you should double up on the tin foil there…

JohnGalt23 on May 8, 2012 at 2:12 PM

Been saying this for a while…Herr Doktor would do more damage to Obama than Romney. Real conservatives and Republicans care more about ridding the nation of Obama than cutting our noses off to spite our face. Paul on the other hand splits the anti-semitic, pot-head, anarchist, Hate/Blame America-first crowd w/ Obama…game, set, match Romney.

Rogue on May 8, 2012 at 2:12 PM

Gary Johnson, on the other hand, appeals to a large segment of Ron Paul’s base, who are considered right-libertarians, and who focus more on economic liberties rather than civil liberties. They like the idea of the income tax being reduced to zero and government expenditures being cut by $1 trillion the first year (not that those things could happen, but aiming for a $1 trillion cut and getting only a half-trillion cut is preferable to shooting for a half-trillion and getting only $30 billion).

cavalier973 on May 8, 2012 at 2:13 PM

…and Go Cruz in Texas!

annoyinglittletwerp on May 8, 2012 at 2:10 PM

Go Craig! Drive Lubbock nuts. Well, even more than they already are.

cozmo on May 8, 2012 at 2:14 PM

Go Cruz in Texas!

Yes! WE will be voting next Tuesday for Ted!
L

letget on May 8, 2012 at 2:14 PM

Romney for the win!

bluegill on May 8, 2012 at 2:14 PM

Herr Doktor?

cavalier973 on May 8, 2012 at 2:15 PM

He has almost no chance of victory, and such a decision would almost certainly damage the influence of his son Rand in the Republican Party.

FIFY, Ed.

Shump on May 8, 2012 at 2:15 PM

AngusMc on May 8, 2012 at 2:08 PM

Lefties are so cute when they engage in coordinated efforts to destroy someone’s credibility and they are so ineffectual.

Rasmussen has a better record in national presidential polls than several others, like CBS and/or CNN/USA Today, which usually tell lefties what they want to hear – but ultimately prove inaccurate until they straighten out their samples a week or so before election day.

DRayRaven on May 8, 2012 at 2:15 PM

He has almost no chance of victory, and such a decision would almost certainly damage the influence of his son Rand in the Republican Party.

FIFY for real, Ed.

Shump on May 8, 2012 at 2:15 PM

I’m not really surprised by this, talking to a lot of my friends and their friends (23-33yrs old) a lot of them spew typical ignorant “facts” about the Republican party that makes it clear to me they will NEVER vote for a Republican, even with a moderate candidate like Romney.

However, they are drawn to Paul because of his aura of “kill the giant too big government” and the slant of coverage that makes him almost appear a hip, old rebel. I often laugh when talking to them, because the reasons they give for voting for someone like Paul are almost the exact reason why they should like a conservative Republican. But they all say the same thing…they’re terrified that the conservatives if given control would ban everything under the sun and make it a “Christian Taliban” country. *shakes head*

nextgen_repub on May 8, 2012 at 2:16 PM

Ron Paul beaming his plans for shenanigans into your head again, Retar

I believe there have been a number of news stories detailing Ronulan “plots” have their delegates appointed as convention delegates…so they may abstain on the first vote and vote “Paul” on the second and other ideas to make the Convention not run so smoothly. But I guess those were just stories….Which is different from winning caucuses, which Ronulans can do.

JFKY on May 8, 2012 at 2:17 PM

There’s something about the thought of a three-way with Ron Paul that makes me queasy…

Bruno Strozek on May 8, 2012 at 2:06 PM

But you are fine with a three-way with Obama and Romney? Weird.

iwasbornwithit on May 8, 2012 at 2:17 PM

This one will light up Angryed.

Jabberwock on May 8, 2012 at 2:04 PM

Oh, he was lit up in the Headlines thread. Good times, good times.

dczombie on May 8, 2012 at 2:18 PM

This poll did oversample Republicans over Democrats, however, with a D/R/I of 36/33/31.

WHAAAA? A Rasmussen poll? No way.

angryed on May 8, 2012 at 2:19 PM

cozmo on May 8, 2012 at 2:14 PM

I need Spawn to comment when he gets home from school and defend my HONOR!
*snort* *giggle* *Guffaw*

annoyinglittletwerp on May 8, 2012 at 2:19 PM

I dunno’, he got kicked around pretty hard when this was in the headlines. besser tots tried for a while and now it is down to floating rock to keep the rant going.

cozmo on May 8, 2012 at 2:12 PM

LOL. Got kicked around. Sure. I posted how completely inaccurate Rasmussen polls are. Then you “kicked me around” by covering your eyes and repeating I see no evil, I see no evil, I see no evil.

angryed on May 8, 2012 at 2:20 PM

I often laugh when talking to them, because the reasons they give for voting for someone like Paul are almost the exact reason why they should like a conservative Republican.

nextgen_repub on May 8, 2012 at 2:16 PM

If only a “conservative Republican” were running for president (other than Paul). But you go ahead and keep supporting the Goldman Sachs owned, pro-choice, anti-gun, pro-stimulus, pro-TARP, global warmist champion of socialized medicine statist and pretend he is a “conservative Republican.”

iwasbornwithit on May 8, 2012 at 2:21 PM

annoyinglittletwerp on May 8, 2012 at 2:19 PM

Really, you are gonna’ throw the kid in on the deep end? Right away?

What kind of mom are you? An 18 year old kid is like veal. Or puppy, just ask 0bama.

cozmo on May 8, 2012 at 2:21 PM

Once again, this is what Rasmussen does:

The 105 polls released in Senate and gubernatorial races by Rasmussen Reports and its subsidiary, Pulse Opinion Research, missed the final margin between the candidates by 5.8 points, a considerably higher figure than that achieved by most other pollsters. Some 13 of its polls missed by 10 or more points, including one in the Hawaii Senate race that missed the final margin between the candidates by 40 points, the largest error ever recorded in a general election in FiveThirtyEight’s database, which includes all polls conducted since 1998.

Moreover, Rasmussen’s polls were quite biased, overestimating the standing of the Republican candidate by almost 4 points on average. In just 12 cases, Rasmussen’s polls overestimated the margin for the Democrat by 3 or more points. But it did so for the Republican candidate in 55 cases — that is, in more than half of the polls that it issued.

He is a Republican soothsayer and nothing more.

angryed on May 8, 2012 at 2:22 PM

Ron Paul is going to be the nominee
Mitt Romney cheats
Rush Limbaugh smeared Ron Paul right as he was surging………..

………………..FR.

JPeterman on May 8, 2012 at 2:22 PM

LOL. Got kicked around. Sure.

angryed on May 8, 2012 at 2:20 PM

Maybe not in your delusional mind, but in the real world, yes.

cozmo on May 8, 2012 at 2:22 PM

However, they are drawn to Paul because of his aura of “kill the giant too big government” and the slant of coverage that makes him almost appear a hip, old rebel. I often laugh when talking to them, because the reasons they give for voting for someone like Paul are almost the exact reason why they should like a conservative Republican. But they all say the same thing…they’re terrified that the conservatives if given control would ban everything under the sun and make it a “Christian Taliban” country. *shakes head*

nextgen_repub on May 8, 2012 at 2:16 PM

Meanwhile North Carolina is going to the polls today over a gay marriage amendment. So keep shaking your head.

Dante on May 8, 2012 at 2:22 PM

So what are we so worried about then???

That possibly barack will pull some Acorn out of his a$$ and use his Chicago politics to steal the election maybe.

DuctTapeMyBrain on May 8, 2012 at 2:23 PM

Who here thinks Paul is still a “stalking horse” for Romney? What a bunch of tin-foil hat wearing conspiracy nuts.

iwasbornwithit on May 8, 2012 at 2:23 PM

Looking at the numbers…

If the GOP had perhaps been actually conservative, and hadn’t decided to become Democrat-Lite…would that Romney [GOP candidate} gap versus Obama be much wider at this point? That 16% or so for Ron Paul speaks volumes. Ron Paul is not drawing thousands of scores of liberal voters. And Romney is losing scores and scores of Conservative voters.

We may have a shot at a 1984-type vote here….with Obama maybe taking DC…and maybe one or two too-liberal-for-their-own-good states…and nothing else.

Unless Election 2012 is a huge margin defeating Obama, a la 1984…God help us if it is almost too-close to call…there is no way Obama and friends will concede and they’ll fight it right up to and past Inauguration Day…and rip this Nation apart in the process.

I’d like to be able to vote for my favorite candidate, sure…but, if push comes to shove…

Cannot let the Left steal this election nor engineer a fraudulent vote. We have to get the numbers out there. We’ve no other choice.

Does anyone with a brain and conscience really want the best friend of Bill Ayers getting a no-accountability second chance?

coldwarrior on May 8, 2012 at 2:23 PM

If only a “conservative Republican” were running for president (other than Paul). But you go ahead and keep supporting the Goldman Sachs owned, pro-choice, anti-gun, pro-stimulus, pro-TARP, global warmist champion of socialized medicine statist and pretend he is a “conservative Republican.”

iwasbornwithit on May 8, 2012 at 2:21 PM

Rush/Sean zombies would tell you how wonderful Obama is tomorrow if he switched parties. They have been brainwashed into believing anything with “R” next to it is good.

angryed on May 8, 2012 at 2:23 PM

Once again, this is what Rasmussen does:

angryed on May 8, 2012 at 2:22 PM

And you didn’t back it up the first time either.

cozmo on May 8, 2012 at 2:24 PM

Maybe not in your delusional mind, but in the real world, yes.

cozmo on May 8, 2012 at 2:22 PM

I give you facts. You ignore them and think you “kicked me around”. Whatever makes you feel better about voting for a “severly conservative” liberal.

angryed on May 8, 2012 at 2:24 PM

Meanwhile North Carolina is going to the polls today over a gay marriage amendment. So keep shaking your head.

Dante on May 8, 2012 at 2:22 PM

The important thing is how do they stand on the birther issue?

cozmo on May 8, 2012 at 2:25 PM

And you didn’t back it up the first time either.

cozmo on May 8, 2012 at 2:24 PM

Back up what? He had the worst record of any pollster in 2010. What more do you need? You people are bizarre.

angryed on May 8, 2012 at 2:25 PM

If only a “conservative Republican” were running for president (other than Paul). But you go ahead and keep supporting the Goldman Sachs owned, pro-choice, anti-gun, pro-stimulus, pro-TARP, global warmist champion of socialized medicine statist and pretend he is a “conservative Republican.”

Well I didn’t mean to call Romney a conservative, my point was that outside of social issues (abortion, gay rights, etc) a lot of people I talk to agree with Republican ideals over Democratic.

But they all have this fear that the Republican party is held hostage by the social cons. And that’s why none of them want to vote for a Republican.

nextgen_repub on May 8, 2012 at 2:26 PM

This poll did oversample Republicans over Democrats, however, with a D/R/I of 36/33/31. That’s in the ballpark of the 2010 turnout model (35/35/30)

I’m confused. How did Republicans get oversampled if they were 3% fewer Republicans sampled than Dems?

Bitter Clinger on May 8, 2012 at 2:26 PM

coldwarrior on May 8, 2012 at 2:23 PM

The cold war ended 20 years ago. Your paranoia lives on.

angryed on May 8, 2012 at 2:27 PM

I give you facts.
angryed on May 8, 2012 at 2:24 PM

Nope

cozmo on May 8, 2012 at 2:27 PM

You people are bizarre.

angryed on May 8, 2012 at 2:25 PM

I am thankful for that. You nutballs always consider normal people bizzare.

cozmo on May 8, 2012 at 2:28 PM

Well I didn’t mean to call Romney a conservative, my point was that outside of social issues (abortion, gay rights, etc) a lot of people I talk to agree with Republican ideals over Democratic.

But they all have this fear that the Republican party is held hostage by the social cons. And that’s why none of them want to vote for a Republican.

nextgen_repub on May 8, 2012 at 2:26 PM

Outside of social issues what is the difference between Ds and Rs? Both want more govt, more spending, more taxes. Romney wants to increase taxes on those making $200K+, Obama wants to increase on those making $250K+.

angryed on May 8, 2012 at 2:29 PM

angryed on May 8, 2012 at 2:24 PM

They absolutely do not care about principles anymore. It is all about Team “R” and a hatred of Obama. I hate Obama too. But what the hell was the tea party for if the GOP is going to force a nominee down our throats that is against everything that the tea party stood for?

The level of cognitive dissonance here as it relates to Romney’s complete lack of a conservative record is simply amazing.

iwasbornwithit on May 8, 2012 at 2:29 PM

Who here thinks Paul is still a “stalking horse” for Romney? What a bunch of tin-foil hat wearing conspiracy nuts.

iwasbornwithit on May 8, 2012 at 2:23 PM

I kinda hoped for it – would work just fine to keep Ron Paul close to the Fed but far from War Room – but never really believed in this theory.

Archivarix on May 8, 2012 at 2:29 PM

Rush/Sean zombies would tell you how wonderful Obama is tomorrow if he switched parties. They have been brainwashed into believing anything with “R” next to it is good.

angryed on May 8, 2012 at 2:23 PM

Since you plan to vote for Obama, why don’t you go ahead and tell us now how wonderful he is? Go ahead, extol his virtues.

dczombie on May 8, 2012 at 2:30 PM

There’s something about the thought of a three-way with Ron Paul that makes me queasy…

Bruno Strozek on May 8, 2012 at 2:06 PM

It’s the fault of those meddling kids.

kim roy on May 8, 2012 at 2:30 PM

I kept sayign that a ROn Paul 3rd party run would possibly hurt Obama more than the GOP nom. But did you listen to me? Noooooo!

I mean, come on. The guy occused us of kill 100,000 1,000,000 Iraqis. Now which side is more likley to blame our country for all of the world’s evils.

DethMetalCookieMonst on May 8, 2012 at 2:31 PM

Heh. Go, sow anarchy, Ronulans!

[munching popcorn]

alwaysfiredup on May 8, 2012 at 2:31 PM

Rasmussen has a better record in national presidential polls than several others, like CBS and/or CNN/USA Today, which usually tell lefties what they want to hear – but ultimately prove inaccurate until they straighten out their samples a week or so before election day.

DRayRaven on May 8, 2012 at 2:15 PM

You are spouting nothing but talking points, just like a lefty (which you wrongly accuse me of being). I look at polls and poll trends. Rasmussen has been wild and all over the place in accuracy in the last few years. Almost every major pollster did better than them in 2010. Several, including CNN and NBC, did better in 2008.

As for changing the numbers a week before election day Rasmussen is notorious for that. 2008 is an example if you look into it.

Good rule of thumb: mistrust any single poll on any subject. Comparing and averaging multiple polls from multiple pollsters can help adjust for pollster methodological problems or narrative setting.

AngusMc on May 8, 2012 at 2:31 PM

We should pay Paul to run and I wouldn’t mind the GOP moving more libertarian.

aniptofar on May 8, 2012 at 2:05 PM

People can donate to Ron Paul here : )
http://www.ronpaul2012.com/

FloatingRock on May 8, 2012 at 2:31 PM

[munching popcorn]

alwaysfiredup on May 8, 2012 at 2:31 PM

Chicken

cozmo on May 8, 2012 at 2:32 PM

It’s the fault of those meddling kids.

kim roy on May 8, 2012 at 2:30 PM

Ruh-row?

coldwarrior on May 8, 2012 at 2:32 PM

cozmo on May 8, 2012 at 2:21 PM

Y’all think I’m bad-well just you wait.
Heheheheheh

annoyinglittletwerp on May 8, 2012 at 2:33 PM

Yes! WE will be voting next Tuesday for Ted!
L

letget on May 8, 2012 at 2:14 PM

Better make it Saturday for your local elections. Then the primary is on the 29th.

TexasDan on May 8, 2012 at 2:33 PM

I wouldn’t mind the GOP moving more libertarian.

aniptofar on May 8, 2012 at 2:05 PM

Your lips keyboard to God’s ear.

coldwarrior on May 8, 2012 at 2:33 PM

This poll did oversample Republicans over Democrats, however, with a D/R/I of 36/33/31. That’s in the ballpark of the 2010 turnout model (35/35/30)

I’m confused. How did Republicans get oversampled if they were 3% fewer Republicans sampled than Dems?

Bitter Clinger on May 8, 2012 at 2:26 PM

Ed flipped a couple numbers. I think Ed meant to type 36R/33D/31I

AngusMc on May 8, 2012 at 2:34 PM

Rush/Sean zombies would tell you how wonderful Obama is tomorrow if he switched parties. They have been brainwashed into believing anything with “R” next to it is good.

angryed on May 8, 2012 at 2:23 PM

Geez. Stop. Just stop. You think most of us are HAPPY with Romney being the candidate? Seriously?

Most of us realize that a doorstop would be better than Obama and if that doorstop turns out to be called Romney then so be it.

What is WRONG with you? No really. What happened to you?? You’ve lost all cognitive and rational thought.

I’d like nothing better than to see us storm the convention castle and drop Palin or Perry or DeMint in there, but it ain’t happening.

What did it for me was the “transmit this to Vladimir” BS. That’s when I realized that Obama would do anything for political expediency and his ego. I also knew that none of the GOP candidates, even the ones I didn’t like, wouldn’t even THINK to do something like that.

You are a fool, angryed. This is my last post to you and as someone who has defended you and your opinions in the past, I just feel sad for you.

kim roy on May 8, 2012 at 2:36 PM

[munching popcorn]

alwaysfiredup on May 8, 2012 at 2:31 PM

Chicken

cozmo on May 8, 2012 at 2:32 PM

Mongolian

alwaysfiredup on May 8, 2012 at 2:36 PM

annoyinglittletwerp on May 8, 2012 at 2:33 PM

But is he as much of a tease?

And does he have a bunny suit?

cozmo on May 8, 2012 at 2:36 PM

Ron Paul is going to be the nominee
Mitt Romney cheats
Rush Limbaugh smeared Ron Paul right as he was surging………..

………………..FR.

JPeterman on May 8, 2012 at 2:22 PM

I didn’t say Ron Paul “is” going to be the nominee, I’m saying he could and should be the nominee. And if not him, then somebody a lot more like him than like Obama/Romney.

FloatingRock on May 8, 2012 at 2:37 PM

The level of cognitive dissonance here as it relates to Romney’s complete lack of a conservative record is simply amazing.

iwasbornwithit on May 8, 2012 at 2:29 PM

In addition to his poor record, we have Romney’s recent talking points that should cause voters to pause. For example, he thinks that allowing Americans to keep $1 trillion of their money instead of having the FedGov spend it for them would shrink the economy.

cavalier973 on May 8, 2012 at 2:38 PM

Most of us realize that a doorstop would be better than Obama and if that doorstop turns out to be called Romney then so be it.

kim roy on May 8, 2012 at 2:36 PM

So we just lower our expectations to doorstop? I can’t do that. Not in my DNA. Gary Johnson would be a better president than Mitt Romney, hands down. 2 term governor who held down the budget? Count me in.

alwaysfiredup on May 8, 2012 at 2:38 PM

The level of cognitive dissonance here as it relates to Romney’s complete lack of a conservative record is simply amazing.

iwasbornwithit on May 8, 2012 at 2:29 PM

I’m not joking when I say it’s the Rush/Sean mindset. As long as it has an “R” next to it, Sean/Rush give it the big thumbs up. And their zombie followers do the same.

angryed on May 8, 2012 at 2:38 PM

cozmo on May 8, 2012 at 2:36 PM

I wouldn’t know.
I don’t WANT to know.

annoyinglittletwerp on May 8, 2012 at 2:39 PM

AngusMc on May 8, 2012 at 2:31 PM

Actually, I’m not spouting talking points you are. Your posts are so similar to angryd, you’re either the same person or you’re getting your information from the same source, which is probably a left-wing blog.

I said Rasmussen’s accuracy for national presidential polls is far better than most, and it is. I didn’t talk about congressional or state races in 2010, so you’re off-point as far as my post goes anyway.

Also, it’s pretty standard for several other polls to oversample Democrats, as you (should) well know.

DRayRaven on May 8, 2012 at 2:39 PM

Most of us realize that a doorstop would be better than Obama and if that doorstop turns out to be called Romney then so be it.

What is WRONG with you? No really. What happened to you?? You’ve lost all cognitive and rational thought.

I’d like nothing better than to see us storm the convention castle and drop Palin or Perry or DeMint in there, but it ain’t happening.

What did it for me was the “transmit this to Vladimir” BS. That’s when I realized that Obama would do anything for political expediency and his ego. I also knew that none of the GOP candidates, even the ones I didn’t like, wouldn’t even THINK to do something like that.

You are a fool, angryed. This is my last post to you and as someone who has defended you and your opinions in the past, I just feel sad for you.

kim roy on May 8, 2012 at 2:36 PM

Just give up and resign yourself to a GOP led by the likes of Romney, Christie, Boehner and McConnell. And kiss any chance of a conservative being president goodbye forever.

angryed on May 8, 2012 at 2:40 PM

Archivarix on May 8, 2012 at 2:29 PM

Gosh you are so close to being on the right side of things… At least I can somewhat understand (though I disagree) with your problems with Paul’s foreign policy given your history with the IDF. I don’t say that disrespectfully in any way and I consider Israel a friend and ally of the US as does Ron Paul. Unfortunately, the GOP smear artists have portrayed him as anti-Israel for wanting to stop all foreign aid, which would necessarily include Israel. Ironically, we fund Israel’s enemies more than we do Israel herself.

I simply believe that our domestic issues, especially spending, are far more important to our current and future national interests than foreign policy. In fact, I think that the domestic situation has an incredible influence on our foreign policy. If we could get our fiscal house in order here, I think we would be able to make a lot more sensible foreign policy decisions around the world. Unfortunately, Mitt Romney has zero interest in reducing the size of the federal government. He thinks that prosperity can be achieved merely by tinkering with the tax code while our unfunded liabilities continue to skyrocket. Of course, taxes are part of the problem, but the biggest issue is the reason that those taxes have to be imposed and that is our runaway spending.

iwasbornwithit on May 8, 2012 at 2:41 PM

Strangely enough, most of the farthest left friends whose brains are saturated with bong resin seem to favor Ron Paul of all the candidates. These might otherwise vote for Obama.

Rand Paul actually has a chance with this crowd. If his foreign policy positions actually make some sense, and he doesn’t go full on libertarian, maintaining at lest some sense of values, (tenth amendment territory anyhow), this is what a great uniter might actually look like.

Greek Fire on May 8, 2012 at 2:42 PM

Geez. Stop. Just stop. You think most of us are HAPPY with Romney being the candidate? Seriously?

kim roy on May 8, 2012 at 2:36 PM

I think people who vote for authoritarian statists, regardless of how they feel about it, enable authoritarian statism. But for enablers such as yourself, authoritarian statists and their cronies would not be in control of our country, turning it into a nanny police-state, briskly accelerating toward totalitarianism.

FloatingRock on May 8, 2012 at 2:42 PM

I didn’t say Ron Paul “is” going to be the nominee, I’m saying he could

Could be, if monkey’s flew out of our buttz, or if wishes were horses, or if he hadn’t been such a racist, troofer, blame America old coot.

and should be the nominee. And if not him, then somebody a lot more like him than like Obama/Romney

If you mean someone that makes money from racist newsletters, takes Storm Front Support, goes on Alex Jones radio show, and hypocritically accepts $30 billion in Federal pork, all the while claiming “Gold” to be a panacea, and blaming the US for a majority of the world’s ills; then I guess yes. Otherwise, No.

And no Romney doesn’t pay me to laugh at you…I don’t even like Romney, but he’s going to get the “nod” and he is better than Obama and I just cannot stand you Ronulan running around having snit fits about not being popular enough to win the nomination.

JFKY on May 8, 2012 at 2:43 PM

cozmo on May 8, 2012 at 2:12 PM
LOL. Got kicked around. Sure. I posted how completely inaccurate Rasmussen polls are. Then you “kicked me around” by covering your eyes and repeating I see no evil, I see no evil, I see no evil.

angryed on May 8, 2012 at 2:20 PM

…I’m still seeing flames!…is someone lighting farts then?

KOOLAID2 on May 8, 2012 at 2:43 PM

AngusMc on May 8, 2012 at 2:31 PM

Actually, I’m not spouting talking points you are. Your posts are so similar to angryd, you’re either the same person or you’re getting your information from the same source

DRayRaven on May 8, 2012 at 2:39 PM

You have no idea what you’re talking about. AngusMc and AngryEd are very, veeerrrry different commenters. AM hates Palin, AE likes Palin. AM tends to the establishment, AE tends to the anarchic. You are the one who seems to have difficulty with more than binary options.

alwaysfiredup on May 8, 2012 at 2:43 PM

By voting for one authoritarian statist as opposed to another authoritarian statist because one has an “R” next to his name, people place their party above their country. Americans need to break away from the status quo, if we are going to save America, and vote against authoritarian statists no matter which letter they have next to their name.

FloatingRock on May 8, 2012 at 2:44 PM

So we just lower our expectations to doorstop? I can’t do that. Not in my DNA. Gary Johnson would be a better president than Mitt Romney, hands down. 2 term governor who held down the budget? Count me in.

alwaysfiredup on May 8, 2012 at 2:38 PM

So, what does Mitt Romney have to do to sweeten the deal? What move to the libertarian right would Mitt have to perform for you to see things his way?

JohnGalt23 on May 8, 2012 at 2:44 PM

Most of us realize that a doorstop would be better than Obama and if that doorstop turns out to be called Romney then so be it.

kim roy on May 8, 2012 at 2:36 PM

So we just lower our expectations to doorstop? I can’t do that. Not in my DNA. Gary Johnson would be a better president than Mitt Romney, hands down. 2 term governor who held down the budget? Count me in.

alwaysfiredup on May 8, 2012 at 2:38 PM

I understand that and like I said are any of us HAPPY with Romney? No, of course not.

I sat here and read post after post after post after post about certain people being “unelectable” and c’mon, Gary Johnson is unelectable.

You or I would be a better president than Obama and probably Romney (I can’t vouch for you, but I know I could). ;)

We have frittered away very very good people with excellent records based on “unelectability”. Are we going to all of a sudden pretend it doesn’t matter because Romney is a RINO?

Gary Johnson doesn’t have a hope in heck, but if you feel good about wasting your vote and another four years of Obama, then by all means feel good. You can join in with the liberals who make it their main priority in life to feel good.

The rest of us will eat our practical crap sandwich and plot our revenge.

kim roy on May 8, 2012 at 2:44 PM

Anyone else remember from a few weeks ago…

when Van Jones tore in Libertarians, and the majority of us were thinking…

WTF is this about?

…or when Krugman went nuclear on Paul during a Bloomberg segment?

sort of makes sense now…

budfox on May 8, 2012 at 2:44 PM

Greek Fire on May 8, 2012 at 2:42 PM

My dopehead brother is a Naderite..
I saw him come home from the hospital with my mother-but I still insist that he must have been adopted. We’re NOTHING alike. Thank. Gawd.

annoyinglittletwerp on May 8, 2012 at 2:45 PM

Unfortunately, Mitt Romney has zero interest in reducing the size of the federal government. He thinks that prosperity can be achieved merely by tinkering with the tax code while our unfunded liabilities continue to skyrocket. Of course, taxes are part of the problem, but the biggest issue is the reason that those taxes have to be imposed and that is our runaway spending.

iwasbornwithit on May 8, 2012 at 2:41 PM

Romney increased spending by 26% as governor. He didn’t cut one single govt position. But the morons here think he’s going to take an ax to govt spending in DC.

Rush/Sean….

angryed on May 8, 2012 at 2:45 PM

A guy I know who tends to be fiscally conservative but socially liberal told me that the only candidate that he would vote for over Obama is… Ron Paul.

So, I tend to believe the conclusions of this poll… a Ron Paul independent run would pull some Democrats away from Obama. (And honestly, I think that a majority of those who support Ron Paul would not vote for Romney, even if Ron Paul pulled out of the race. So, in the end, a Ron Paul independent run doesn’t hurt Romney but does hurt Obama.

ITguy on May 8, 2012 at 2:45 PM

2-way: Romney 49% Obama 44%

3-way: Romney 44% Obama 39% Paul 13%

So Paul draws 5% each from Romney and Obama.

Looks like a 3rd party run by Paul slightly favors Romney, since he maintains a 5% lead over Obama. I suspected as much.

The poll also provides evidence that almost 40% of Paul’s supporters are liberals, or liberaltarians, not libertarians — which helps explain a lot of the comments I see from Paul supporters on right-of-center internet blogs and discussion forums.

Combine doctrinaire hard core libertarians with liberals/liberaltarians and you get a lot of comments that would be right at home on DU or Kos.

farsighted on May 8, 2012 at 2:45 PM

The rest of us will eat our practical crap sandwich and plot our revenge.

kim roy on May 8, 2012 at 2:44 PM

How exactly? After 8 years of Romney you think there will ever be a conservative Republican nominee again? You are insane if you do.

angryed on May 8, 2012 at 2:47 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4