Pollster.com

Articles and Analysis

 

US: 2012 Pres Primary (PPP 4/9-11)

Topics: poll

Public Policy Polling (D)
49-11/10; 400 likely Republican primary voters, 4.9% margin of error
Mode: Automated phone
(PPP release

National

2012 President: Republican Primary
33% Romney, 27% Huckabee, 23% Palin

 

Comments
Aaron_in_TX:

A national poll is relatively useless. I'd much rather see IA, NH, SC, and FL.

Romney will never win the nomination unless his oppsition is split. He can't do better than 35% in most polls. There is a huge opening for some conservative superstar. Right now I say Palin is the best equipped to take advantage of that opening.

____________________

Aaron_in_TX:

Although this is the poorest showing for Sarah in one of these polls.

Mitt Romney's PAC made 1.4 million in Q1 2010, compared to $400,000 for Palin and $272,000 for Huckabee (not a good showing).

Palin told the Boston Herald she would consider running as Romney's VP.

____________________

ndirish11:

Huckabee is a religious nut and Palin is pretty close. The vast minority of the US is socially conservative like those two. Nearly all independents identify themselves as socially liberal and fiscally conservative. And even some Democrats identify themselves like that. Because honestly, who identifies them self as fiscally liberal? Haha, you just never hear of it.

If the Republicans could put up more of a moderate/libertarian on social issues then they should win easily. I mean how do the Dems fire up their base? They send mailers and emails about how Huckabee hates gays and how he has called them as bad as drug users or about how Palin wants your raped daughter to have that baby. That's how. If you can take away the social issues and make the race all about economics...it's a no brainer. The Republicans will win as long as they put up someone who isn't "fiscally conservative" like Bush (He spent like a liberal) but actually conservative and as long as that someone is not a homophobe.

At this point I really don't know who that candidate is. I think this election is too important to throw up Huckabee and have him just be torn apart like a wild animal by the Democrats for his social views. The economy, taxes, and spending are what is most important this election, but the Democrats will just make it all about the social issues.

____________________

Aaron_in_TX:

"If the Republicans could put up more of a moderate/libertarian on social issues"

The problem is that the social cons are huge players in the primary electorate. Say the word "abortion" and the name of your opposition in the same sentence and they're basically done. It's one of the main reasons KBH lost to Perry so badly after looking like a shoo-in early on. She hemmed and hawed on the abortion issue.

____________________

Aaron_in_TX:

"The economy, taxes, and spending"

I think these are brought up every election, are they not?

Historically, complaining about spending does now win you elections, because the people who are moved by that generally vote the same way all the time. Conservative republicans complained about spending perennially those 40 years they were out of power. Then the democrats complained about it under Bush. Each side complains about spending when it's the other guy spending on stuff you don't like.

If people who complained about spending were willing to cut everything evenly, INCLUDING DEFENSE, I would take them a little more seriously. But if you complain about programs that help the poor at the same time have no problem with fully funding Lockheed Martin's generous contracts to build the next generation jet fighters that is useless are today's war environments, I don't find those arguments convincing.

____________________

Aaron_in_TX:

^ that last sentence should say "that are useless in today's war environments,"

____________________

ndirish11:

There is truth to what you are saying. The economy, taxes and spending are brought up every election. But they need to be the only thing that's brought up. The social issues can't decide the election because that usually means the Democrats are going to win. A lot of Republicans say I'm personally Pro-Life, but it's a state issue. That way they make their Kentucky supporters happy and then the Liberals in New England don't freak.

I guess all I'm trying to say is if the Republicans can cut the social issues out of the race and the make the race ONLY about the economy they will win.

____________________

Xenobion:

Romney is unelectable.

____________________

jamesia:

"if if if"

The GOP can't cut social issues, because social conservatives make up at least a third and maybe even half their party.

Right now a social liberal, fiscal moderate would win. A strongly fiscal conservative would not because someone like that would support ending Medicare - and that is a wildly popular program. Same for the EPA, FDA, etc. This rules out someone like Ron Paul.

At any rate, I think a social liberal would do well. Romney WAS that person, but you saw how he had to flip flop for the GOP primary...

Now there are tapes out of him arguing in favor of the individual mandate for health insurance in MA. That's the central requirement of the new HIR. Having Romney in these polls is a joke.

____________________



Post a comment




Please be patient while your comment posts - sometimes it takes a minute or two. To check your comment, please wait 60 seconds and click your browser's refresh button. Note that comments with three or more hyperlinks will be held for approval.

MAP - US, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY, PR