RASMUSSEN SHOCK POLL: Barack Obama 41% Ron Paul 37%... developing...

[Romulus]

posted on Drudge!!!!

[sailingaway]

I don't think it's a shock. I think the reason Ron does so badly is because in a primary supporters of other candidates pretend they would never vote for competitors in order to make their own candidates' numbers look better.

In the real general election Ron would do much better than that, as the April 2010 poll Rasmussen did showed, before the primary got heated up, where Ron got 41% to Obama's 42%. Unfortunately Rasmussen moved the main poll behind a subscription wall, but it essentially showed that Ron dominates with independents.

Which we kind of knew, but no one believed.

this is what they left for you to see of the old one: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2012/election_2012_presidential_election/election_2012_barack_obama_42_ron_paul_41

for the new one, go through www.drudgereport.com to thank him for posting this.

[TheState]

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2012/election_2012_presidential_election/obama_41_ron_paul_37

[TCE]

Haven't been trusting Rasmussen since their 2010 catastrophe (http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/04/rasmussen-polls-were-biased-and-inaccurate-quinnipiac-surveyusa-performed-strongly/).

[sailingaway]

Haven't been trusting Rasmussen since their 2010 catastrophe (http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/04/rasmussen-polls-were-biased-and-inaccurate-quinnipiac-surveyusa-performed-strongly/).


They predicted Rand's race pretty well. Unlike PPP which was way off until RIGHT before the election in the 'rating' period. Fivethirtyeight is a division of NYTimes, I'm going to have to look into that a bit more.

[CoreyBowen999]

I find it most interesting how against Paul, Obama's 41% is lowest than against any other candidate..

[TheState]

Is anyone a platinum member at Rasmussen by chance? You have to be to view the crosstabs.

[TCE]

They predicted Rand's race pretty well. Unlike PPP which was way off until RIGHT before the election in the 'rating' period. Fivethirtyeight is a division of NYTimes, I'm going to have to look into that a bit more.

They weren't for the longest time. Their numbers and statistics are usually spot-on, it's the political commentary that is far-left. Definitely read the above article. Rasmussen was way, way off and they will have to regain my trust in this next cycle to have any relevance in my mind. When PPP or SurveyUSA starts verifying some of their findings, I'll believe it.

[sailingaway]

I find it most interesting how against Paul, Obama's 41% is lowest than against any other candidate..

And I'm betting a bunch of those he loses are activists which will hurt him more to lose than regular voters.

[qh4dotcom]

Did anyone notice that they polled all the presidential candidates except Gary Johnson?

[sailingaway]

Did anyone notice that they polled all the presidential candidates except Gary Johnson?

I think there are about 80 declared candidates, actually.

[Bern]

Folks, this poll is good news. 4% differential. Ron Paul is for real. Also, Obama with his lowest poll total versus any og the GOP field. The independents go for Ron.

[Romulus]

Folks, this poll is good news. 4% differential. Ron Paul is for real. Also, Obama with his lowest poll total versus any og the GOP field. The independents go for Ron.

That's what I'm saying.. and he's only getting stronger..

[Pericles]

Even made FOX news.

[harikaried]

I find it most interesting how against Paul, Obama's 41% is lowest than against any other candidate..Yeah, reposting that part of the table for easy reference:

Obama %votes when head-to-head vs..

41% Paul

42% Romney

44% Christie
44% Guliani
44% Huntsman
44% Pawlenty
44% Perry

45% Santorum

46% Bachmann
47% Palin
48% Gingrich
49% Cain

[1836]

I find it most interesting how against Paul, Obama's 41% is lowest than against any other candidate..

Yep. This IS the most important thing.

It proves that independents swing our way, and some Democrats, too. It means more non-Republicans are willing to consider a vote against Ron Paul.

[Romulus]

Repubs WILL vote to keep Obama out.

Obama loses those who he betrayed. Has 0 chance of picking up 'New' support.

Only Ron Paul can beat Obama!

[ChaosControl]

This just goes to show that the primary is the real battle.

[sailingaway]

Even made FOX news.

Now THAT is a shocker....

[scrosnoe]

saw it on Fox and making sure it was here -- this is huge! the report on Fox was generally favorable -- need youtube of it!

[ronpaulitician]

But... Romney beats Obama by 1 percentage point.

[DrRP08]

Did anyone notice that they polled all the presidential candidates except Gary Johnson?

I love GJ but hardly anyone even knows him, his campaign is pretty much dead.

[AGRP]

Isolationist fringe candidate.

[Bern]

But... Romney beats Obama by 1 percentage point.

Not according to the same polling agency presumably using the same polling method (and possibly same polling pool?).

[bunklocoempire]

I'm using this, along with the poll results when communicating with McCain votin'-Reagan lovin'-Muslim-bashin'-lesser of two evil-promotin' Romney mistrustin' so called Tea Party folk...

-I expect great results.:D Try it on your own favorite McCain voter!


It would be a sealed deal if McCain voters could compromise, get behind Paul, and accept a foreign policy that didn't throw our blood and money at Muslim countries.

It was good enough for Reagan.

The independents and some democrats certainly recognize Paul and his rock solid record against nation building and foreign aid.

Paul and Romney polling at the top against Obama, yet they are polar opposite 'Republicans'. If that ain't a clue that a grass roots/Tea Party and an establishment fight is going on I don't know what is.

It kills me that the "lesser of two evils crowd" can't see the opportunity here.


Bunkloco

[moderate libertarian]

I am surprised that Onbama is still polling higher than Dr Paul. Could be polling method bias or margin of error.

[RideTheDirt]

I am surprised that Onbama is still polling higher than Dr Paul. Could be polling method bias or margin of error.
Who did they poll, Obama's Staff?

[moderate libertarian]

Who did they poll, Obama's Staff?

Doubt he would have got higher approval even in that poll if that was a secret poll.

[sailingaway]

I am surprised that Onbama is still polling higher than Dr Paul. Could be polling method bias or margin of error.

I think that is because Obama doesn't have a primary. During the primary, when polled, a bunch say they will NEVER vote for the other candidate, but when it comes down to the general, it is different. The same thing happened in Grayson and Rand's primary. A bunch were saying they wouldn't vote for Rand in the general, but when the general came around, they did.