Reuters snap poll: Romney’s likeability rises after convention — but no bounce yet

posted at 8:18 pm on August 31, 2012 by Allahpundit

The good news? Reuters’s pollster thinks the likeability numbers are more important than the actual head-to-head right now. Bounces come and bounces go but if Romney’s made real headway in how the public sees him, that might translate into a decisive shift six weeks from now when people finally start making up their minds.

The bad news? Dude, I’m nervous:

Especially notable was Romney’s boost among independents, 45 percent of whom rated him favorably, compared with Thursday’s 34 percent. Twenty percent of independents found him likeable, up from Thursday’s 16 percent…

Respondents said Romney would be more effective than Obama as president by a margin of 37 percent to 33 percent. The margin was even wider among independents, at 26 percent versus 17 percent.

Romney and Obama remain in a dead heat in most national polls of voting intentions. Friday’s Reuters/Ipsos poll had Romney with a slim one-point lead among likely voters, effectively unchanged from the day before

“It was more important for Romney to create a more positive image,” [Ipsos pollster Julia Clark] said. “Some of these softer metrics, image issues, they contribute to factors like trust that ultimately do sway some people” when time comes to vote.

So, mission accomplished. Mitt set out to use the convention to show America that he’s a good man, and it worked. If only more people had actually watched it:

Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan continue to draw smaller TV crowds than the 2008 Republican Party duo of John McCain and Sarah Palin. The grand finale of this year’s Republican National Convention featuring Presidential candidate Romney’s acceptance speech and an introduction by Clint Eastwood drew a total of 25.3 million viewers last night from 10-11 PM on ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox News Channel, CNN and MSNBC. That was down 31% from the final hour of the 2008 GOP convention.

Ratings for Ryan’s VP speech were also way, way, way off what they were in 2008. Why the decline this time? Partly it’s a function of Palin’s star power and the historic nature of her candidacy having driven intense interest in the convention four years ago. Partly it’s because, after years of Bush fatigue, the public was excited and curious about the two new teams battling to replace him. (Note that Biden’s VP speech in 2008 actually topped Ryan’s speech ratings-wise as well.) Partly it’s because, thanks to Obama and his own historic candidacy, it was easier for casual voters to appreciate the significance of the election than it is in a cycle where Mitt Romney’s tax returns are one of the “big issues.” And partly it’s because, I think, a lot of poor suckers really bought the Hopenchange message, to the point where they thought some fresh new way of doing business in D.C. was on the menu. Now they know better and they’re jaded, so they’ve tuned out. Or at least, that’s the theory; if the Democratic convention next week does gangbusters business Nielsen-wise then obviously the GOP’s ratings are a much bigger concern than we think right now.

Exit question: Should they have had Hologram Reagan blow the roof off the joint? Clint Eastwood’s got nothing on the 3-D Gipper, my friends.


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

I think the lower ratings may indicate a number of possibilities. It is possible that fewer people watched because they didn’t need to, their minds are already made up. Personally, I watched a few of the speakers, but not even a majority, and I know who I am voting for, or more specifically who I am voting against. Nothing I might have seen would change that.

Secondly, ratings and polls are IMO less accurate than even 4 years ago. Most are done on landlines, which I rarely even answer. Probably the only reason we even keep one is for the alarm system. And I have yet to be polled on my cell phone. Truth is I don’t even know anyone’s landline number, other than businesses. It’s a cellular world now.

I did accidently pick up the landline this season and hit a poll, and wish I hadn’t. I did not agree with most of the answer options I was given.

Another reason is the internet, where many now watch, without the talking heads, and commercials.

But what will be interesting is the DNC numbers. I predict they will be down even more. If they are not, then I’ll worry.

CTimbo on September 2, 2012 at 12:52 AM

We ask that people …

bluegill on September 2, 2012 at 12:38 AM

We ask? LOL

Are you the sole owner and arbiter of Hot Air now?

LOL

INC on September 2, 2012 at 12:55 AM

I’m interested to know the answer to this question: Do people really think Sarah Palin is more conservative than Paul Ryan? Ryan has had a long record of pushing conservative ideas in the HOR. Palin had a few years as Governor of Alaska. I don’t get this continuing resentment from Sarah Palin supporters. No offense to Sarah Palin, because I do like her and McCain wouldn’t have done as well without her, but Paul Ryan is a better speaker.

Laura722 on September 2, 2012 at 8:06 AM

I’m interested to know the answer to this question: Do people really think Sarah Palin is more conservative than Paul Ryan? Ryan has had a long record of pushing conservative ideas in the HOR. Palin had a few years as Governor of Alaska. I don’t get this continuing resentment from Sarah Palin supporters. No offense to Sarah Palin, because I do like her and McCain wouldn’t have done as well without her, but Paul Ryan is a better speaker.

Laura722 on September 2, 2012 at 8:06 AM

Laura, you are using logic and reason; therefore, you won’t get too far with the “only Sarah Palin can save us!” crowd. No matter what Palin does, they will say it’s a genius move. No matter what stupid thing Palin does, they will make excuses for her. For a lot of these people, their fixation on Palin has nothing to do with conservative ideology. OF COURSE Paul Ryan is a vastly superior candidate; it’s a no-brainer. I have no problem with being devoted to a candidate, but Palin is NOT a candidate, and thank goodness for that… she would likely guarantee a Dem win in a general election campaign. I lose my patience with these people when they, despite what’s best for the country, insist on trying to hurt any Republican not named Palin. It’s beyond shameful of them.

bluegill on September 2, 2012 at 8:41 AM

No matter what Palin does, they will say it’s a genius move. No matter what stupid thing Palin does, they will make excuses for her.

bluegill on September 2, 2012 at 8:41 AM

What excuses? You mean, Palin should be excused from not fighting all the tricks of all the Republican termites in Alaska, RNC and Washington GOP lobbyists and Mitt’s paid consultants and strategists? Or you mean Palin should be excused from dirty Alaskan bloggers with tongues like yours?

You blame Palin instead of blaming the lousy organizer of your MittMyth Convention. The support for Palin from ordinary conservatives is simple: Her past actions and principles have been generally conservative with a common sense.

No one can save GOP-E and you don’t need a savior, bluegill! You’ve already lost your marbles, so give it up!

Allahpundit gave you all the hints to “Only Mitt Can Save Us from Obama”:

Ratings for Ryan’s VP speech were also way, way, way off what they were in 2008. Why the decline this time? Partly it’s a function of Palin’s star power and the historic nature of her candidacy having driven intense interest in the convention four years ago. Partly it’s because, after years of Bush fatigue, the public was excited and curious about the two new teams battling to replace him. (Note that Biden’s VP speech in 2008 actually topped Ryan’s speech ratings-wise as well.) Partly it’s because, thanks to Obama and his own historic candidacy, it was easier for casual voters to appreciate the significance of the election than it is in a cycle where Mitt Romney’s tax returns are one of the “big issues.” And partly it’s because, I think, a lot of poor suckers really bought the Hopenchange message, to the point where they thought some fresh new way of doing business in D.C. was on the menu. Now they know better and they’re jaded, so they’ve tuned out. Or at least, that’s the theory; if the Democratic convention next week does gangbusters business Nielsen-wise then obviously the GOP’s ratings are a much bigger concern than we think right now.

Rasmussen’s +4 bounce is actually maximum of +2 for the Team Handsome considering the margin of error. At worst, it’s ZERO.

As a Mittbot, you owe to your master Romney the best apology why his balls didn’t bounce as expected after the star-studded (personality-based) Convention. You can freely use AP’s guide for dummies as quoted in above.

You may even suggest for the GOP-E favorite Conservative called Rubio** replace him! Maybe GOP-E needs two conventions and two potential VPs to win from Obamao, don’t you think?

But first, stop blaming others for your Master’s failure to shine.


IF ROMNEY LOSES … BLAME ROMNEY! PERIOD!

*To save himself, Ryan must get away from GOP-E’s debauchery.

**The Future of GOP-E. What did Rubio* exactly accomplish after his 2-year stint at the Senate? Nothing except big (?) speeches and replacing Crist as Jeb Bush’s apple of the eye in FL… oops … Rubio would have stayed as a nameless wannabe without the T-E-A P-A-R-T-Y!

TheAlamos on September 2, 2012 at 2:29 PM

Lying Nate Silver’s prognosis:

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/01/sept-1-romneys-convention-bounce-appears-middling-so-far/

The FiveThirtyEight “now-cast”, which does not adjust for the bounces associated with the party conventions, estimates that Mr. Obama would have a 72.3 percent chance of winning if the election were held today. That’s essentially unchanged from before the conventions, when the number had ranged between about 70 percent and 74 percent.

One way to interpret the trend in the “now-cast” is that, so far, Mr. Romney’s bounce is hard to distinguish from the statistical noise that we ordinarily see in polls…

I really don’t believe in surveys. But surveys, whether accurate or not, will dictate Romney’s chances. Why? Because his typical voters are those who believe in surveys (i.e., many Republicans like bluegill voted Romney in the primaries because of the surveys that showed Mitt’s hair as most electable!)

Tip to Bluegill: You can be a useful Mittbot by posting in all blogs that “SURVEYS ARE NOT TRUE AFTER THE GOP PRIMARIES AND MITT’S REALLY ELECTABLE”!

THE NEW SLOGAN: GOP-E’S DEMISE IN 2012 WILL BE THE BIRTH OF A NEW CONSERVATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL PARTY!

TheAlamos on September 2, 2012 at 2:42 PM

Laura722 on September 2, 2012 at 8:06 AM

Rather than listening to bluegill’s prejudicial statements, I recommend reading some things Dan McLaughlin wrote about Sarah Palin in October 2008. He has many embedded links:

POLITICS: The Integrity Gap, Part I of III: Gov. Sarah Palin

One of the most basic ways in which a candidate can demonstrate the integrity voters are looking for is to build a record of standing up to corruption and waste – and doing so even when it appears in his or her own party, or on the part of his or her own allies or backers.

And this from his opening paragraph on Obama:

POLITICS: The Integrity Gap, Part II of III: Sen. Barack Obama

In Part I of this series on the “Integrity Gap” between the two national tickets, I looked at Governor Sarah Palin’s record of integrity in public office – her battles against corruption and wasteful spending, even by the powers controlling her own party in her home state of Alaska – even when she was putting her career at risk. As I explained, integrity is not just about honesty – it’s also about one of the crucial presidential character traits, toughness. Palin has proven that she doesn’t back down no matter who she has to take on.

INC on September 2, 2012 at 3:01 PM

IOW Sarah Palin has guts. She did not hesitate to go against the Republican establishment in Alaska, even at the risk of her career. To find a politician who will do that is like finding a needle in a haystack. It’s a big reason the GOP establishment despises her. It’s a big reason why I respect her.

Some of Ryan’s votes were going along to get along. You might want to read: Ryan During the Bush Years: Miserable by Peter Robinson. He quotes from a profile done by Ryan Lizza.

Like many young conservatives, he is embarrassed by the Bush years. At the time, as a junior member with little clout, Ryan was a reliable Republican vote for policies that were key in causing enormous federal budget deficits: sweeping tax cuts, a costly prescription-drug entitlement for Medicare, two wars, the multibillion-dollar bank-bailout legislation known as TARP. In all, five trillion dollars was added to the national debt.

In 2006 and 2008, many of Ryan’s older Republican colleagues were thrown out of office as a result of lobbying scandals and overspending. Ryan told me recently that, as a fiscal conservative, he was “miserable during the last majority” and is determined “to do everything I can to make sure I don’t feel that misery again.”

It remains to be seen how Ryan will act if he becomes Veep. There are definite differing POVs between him and Romney, because Paul Ryan is a conservative.

INC on September 2, 2012 at 3:10 PM

I had a 8th grade teacher who frequently quoted this saying to the class:

What you are to be, you are now becoming.

I have no idea who said it, but the gist obviously is that the choices you make today become part of you. That’s not to be fatalistic, because people can change, but it’s a caution against wrong decisions in the present, thinking at some future point you will be able to change things.

This is why it’s important to ignore politicians’ rhetoric and look at their past behavior. If one of them advocates something, is there a reason from his past to believe his words are true? If one of them says he’s changed, has he really? Does he demonstrate a willingness to back up words with deeds?

INC on September 2, 2012 at 3:16 PM

I will say this, Ryan is one of the few Republicans other than Sarah Palin, to really get under Obama’s skin.

But I want to remind you that Sarah Palin is the politician who again and again, come wind, come weather, kept going after Obama at whatever continuing personal cost to herself and her family.

She is the one who showed up with Andrew Breitbart during the WI protests.

Andrew and Governor Sarah Palin walked into the lion’s den that afternoon – straight into the state’s Capitol, ground zero. Surrounding them were the most dangerous people in the world not sitting in a jail: spoiled union thugs addicted to getting something for nothing.There were hundreds, maybe thousands of them, and their malevolent purpose that day was two-fold: to make sure the opposition’s message wasn’t heard and to send a message of intimidation to anyone else who might also consider speaking out.

“He’s shouting all aboard the bullet train to bankruptcy… The 2012 election begins here. We will fight for America and it starts here in Madison, Wisconsin. Mr. President, game on!”

The GOP elite let her twist in the wind when she was all but accused of pulling the trigger when Gabby Giffords was shot. They despise her, and have been more concerned with their political futures than standing up for her, or standing up for the country.

Yet for all she has done over the past 3+ years, not a word was said in thanks at the convention. Even those politicians she most recently helped, such as Walker and Cruz, didn’t mention her name. Romney in his speech, when he was saying he wished his mom could see the Republican women politicians, didn’t mention her name, even though some of the women he did mention were helped by Sarah Palin. It was despicably ungrateful, but not surprising.

Do I agree with everything she has said or done? No. But she has my respect and is one of the few politicians whom I don’t expect to see deeds betraying words. As for most of the rest of them, as True King frequently says around here, “The GOP will betray you.”

INC on September 2, 2012 at 4:10 PM

The facts do not matter, to the likes of bluegill, who is right up there with the borderline Trig denialists, at Right Speak, if not an Obamabot,

narciso on September 2, 2012 at 8:08 PM

narciso on September 2, 2012 at 8:08 PM

That’s very true.

INC on September 2, 2012 at 8:33 PM

What we can take to the bank, is that they will rain all sorts of lies and distortions, upon Romney and Ryan, it doesn’t matter if it
is true, in fact it’s better that it be totally fabricated,

narciso on September 2, 2012 at 8:37 PM

Talk about cultists…LOL
idesign on August 31, 2012 at 9:43 PM

Now, that’s just rich.

Rusty Allen on September 2, 2012 at 9:37 PM

INC on September 2, 2012 at 3:10 PM

TheAlamos on September 2, 2012 at 2:42 PM

You Sarah Palin fanatics are a joke. You attack any Republican not named Palin. Now youre trying to denigrate Paul Ryan? The truth is that the diva dunce Palin isnt fit to even shine Ryan’s shoes. I’m so sick of you people ranting about how Palin is a victim, and I voted for the woman in 2008. She’s not a candidate anymore. DEAL. WITH. IT.

bluegill on September 2, 2012 at 10:38 PM

Was she a diva, when she endorsed Ryan as far back as February 2010,
of when she called out the pernicious effects of QE 2, debating the Journal’s own reports, as the source.

narciso on September 2, 2012 at 11:09 PM

bluegill on September 2, 2012 at 10:38 PM

LOL.

Because I assert Palin’s integrity I’m ranting that she’s a victim?

Because I say I don’t agree with everything she’s said or done, I’m a fanatic?

Because I told the truth about Ryan, I’m denigrating him?

“Don’t be afraid to see what you see.”
–Ronald Reagan in his Farewell Address.

MM’s corollary: “And to speak what you see.”

INC on September 3, 2012 at 1:51 AM

INC on September 3, 2012 at 1:51 AM

I probably shouldn’t have quoted you, since your comments weren’t really what I was responding to. So, that was my mistake.

I was directing my comments more at so-called Palinistas who denigrate other Republicans and revel in any perceived difficulty they might be having. For them, the concern isn’t what’s best for the country; it’s what’s best for Sarah.

The bottom line is that Sarah Palin is not a candidate. It’s time to move on. Some of you people are fixated on this woman to a strange, creepy degree.

IF ROMNEY LOSES … BLAME ROMNEY! PERIOD!

*To save himself, Ryan must get away from GOP-E’s debauchery.

**The Future of GOP-E. What did Rubio* exactly accomplish after his 2-year stint at the Senate? Nothing except big (?) speeches and replacing Crist as Jeb Bush’s apple of the eye in FL… oops … Rubio would have stayed as a nameless wannabe without the T-E-A P-A-R-T-Y!

TheAlamos on September 2, 2012 at 2:29 PM

imma gonna watch Sarah’s historic 2008 speech. Our future president.

can’t watch ryan for too long, i think of this john fogerty tune http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PcTG2z8CgmY [Eye of the Zombie] when i see his eyes.

renalin on August 29, 2012 at 9:17 PM

i hope Sarah see’s that fox news is no longer home to conservatives.

i hope sarah see’s that the republican party is no longer home to conservatives.

time to go rogue.

renalin on August 29, 2012 at 8:56 PM

bluegill on September 3, 2012 at 3:40 AM

This ‘he’s a good man and just over his head’ strategy is just untenable in light of the facts, and they will not reciprocate,

narciso on September 3, 2012 at 9:20 AM

In case you missed it…but Obama’s fate was sealed in 09…it’s called ‘obamacare’. Look at the outcome of the political elections since O was elected

Romney wins in November. People already know who they’re voting for..his name ISN’T Obama. In droves. Silent majority.

Redford on September 3, 2012 at 2:08 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3