Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 60

Thread: Poll: Obama 42, Romney 36, Paul 13

  1. #1

    Default Poll: Obama 42, Romney 36, Paul 13

    PPP's monthly look ahead to the 2012 Presidential race finds that Ron Paul could play a major role as a third party candidate. He gets 13% in a hypothetical three way contest with Barack Obama getting 42% and Mitt Romney 36%.

    Paul would draw his support in such a scenario from conservative leaning voters who are unhappy with the Republican party. 44% who say they would vote for him are Republicans compared to 41% independents and 15% Democrats. 49% are conservatives, 37% are moderates, and 14% are liberals. But only 26% of them think Congressional Republicans are doing a good job to 61% who disapprove

    In a direct head to head between Obama and Romney the President leads 45-42 so Paul as a third party candidate could be worth roughly 3 points to Obama's margin of victory.
    http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot....thly-2012.html

    Among men, it's Romney 38, Obama 36, Paul 16

    Favorables:

    Romney: 35/37
    Huckabee: 32/34
    Palin: 37/54
    Gingrich: 31/48
    Christie: 14/20
    Ron Paul: 23/34 (16/35 among women, 31/34 among men, 27/21 among students)

    Favorables with independents:

    Paul: +1 (best)
    Gingrich: -27
    Palin: -23
    Obama: -5
    Huckabee: -14
    Romney: -6
    Last edited by Epic; 08-12-2010 at 10:18 AM.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    Member Lucille's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    http://twitter.com/MacGhil
    Posts
    10,427

    Default

    Why do these pollsters constantly fantasize about a Ron Paul third party run? How many times does he have to say he won't run third party because it's a dead end road? The two-headed one party system has it all locked up.

    Is it just an attempt to demonize him in his own party ahead of the '12 campaigns?

  4. #3
    Member malkusm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    5,673
    Blog Entries
    10

    Default

    Compare this to the first poll conducted in 1992 which included Ross Perot as an Independent candidate:

    Bush 37%
    Clinton 35%
    Perot 21%

    Then consider that, 4 months later amidst a souring economy, Perot was leading the polls.

  5. #4
    Member malkusm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    5,673
    Blog Entries
    10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lucille View Post
    Why do these pollsters constantly fantasize about a Ron Paul third party run? How many times does he have to say he won't run third party because it's a dead end road? The two-headed one party system has it all locked up.

    Is it just an attempt to demonize him in his own party ahead of the '12 campaigns?
    No, the GOP leadership has already demonized Paul enough, I think.

    I continue to say that Ron should run on the GOP ticket through Iowa and New Hampshire. If he doesn't sniff a victory in either state, drop out and run Independent, in time for the "sore loser" laws in other states to be null and void. Announce an independent-minded Democrat as your running mate, and run your campaign on "the end of partisanship, the beginning of freedom." Maybe someone like this guy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Schweitzer

    ETA: Also, dropping out and running Independent does nothing to damage the work we will continue to do within the GOP. He will be 76 years old in 2012 and would likely be contemplating retirement from Congress regardless.

  6. #5

    Default

    I'm almost in support of a final "fuck-all" move by Ron as an independent.

  7. #6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by malkusm View Post
    No, the GOP leadership has already demonized Paul enough, I think.

    I continue to say that Ron should run on the GOP ticket through Iowa and New Hampshire. If he doesn't sniff a victory in either state, drop out and run Independent, in time for the "sore loser" laws in other states to be null and void. Announce an independent-minded Democrat as your running mate, and run your campaign on "the end of partisanship, the beginning of freedom." Maybe someone like this guy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Schweitzer

    ETA: Also, dropping out and running Independent does nothing to damage the work we will continue to do within the GOP. He will be 76 years old in 2012 and would likely be contemplating retirement from Congress regardless.
    I like this idea - but the debates are key to public opinion, and if he is not in them, he doesnt stand a chance.

  8. #7
    Moderator jdmyprez_deo_vindice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Eastern Shore of Maryland
    Posts
    5,424
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Just seeing Ron Paul in double digits does my heart good. Keep up the pressure folks and keep doing what you know how to do to wake the people up. The day is coming soon where we are going to lead a steamroller all across the land putting liberty candidates into offices at the local, state and federal levels and it is going all the way to the White House.

    Ron Paul 2012 FTW
    "Governor, if I had foreseen the use those people
    designed to make of their victory,
    there would have been no surrender at
    Appomattox Courthouse; no sir, not by me.
    Had I foreseen these results of subjugation,
    I would have preferred to die at Appomattox
    with my brave men, my sword in my right hand." - Robert E. Lee to Governor Fletcher S. Stockdale (D-Texas), 1870


  9. #8

    Default

    Keep in mind the threshhold to get in the debates is 15%. Ron Paul hasn't even announced a Republican campaign yet and he's at 13%. If it becomes apparent that he can't win the nomination and the GOP can't beat Obama, he should capitalize on the possibility of being in the presidential debates against Obama and Romney (or whoever the neocons put up). Assuming he could maintain his good poll numbers, he could be attacking Obama for continuing Bush's policies abroad and on civil liberties, attack Romney for his corporatism, and give both of them a lesson on economics.

  10. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by malkusm View Post
    Compare this to the first poll conducted in 1992 which included Ross Perot as an Independent candidate:

    Bush 37%
    Clinton 35%
    Perot 21%

    Then consider that, 4 months later amidst a souring economy, Perot was leading the polls.
    As I recall, he dropped out while he was ahead, then reentered at 7%, then the debates boosted him to 19%.

  11. #10

    Default

    If Ron Paul runs as a third party I will not support him nor forgive him. He will be condemning us to suffer under the HC Bill. There never is a leftist third party challenger only the conservative crowd entertains the idea.

    In fact both times Clinton was able to get elected thanks to Ross Perot a third party candidate. I am glad people here are so apt to be used as political pawns to ensure a leftist win. I however am appalled at what has been done this year, to our economy, to our HC, to our liberties, and the corruption, bailouts, and the bribes and dirty deals.

    I want HC undone, and my freedoms preserved, a 2012 win by any Democrat will not do this for me, nor will there be ANY chance at reigning in government. Obama and his administration are WORSE than Bush and this despite my being apathetic to Obama getting elected because Bush disgusted me so much. I was wrong to be apathetic, I learned that the Democrats are capable of serious crimes against the most basic of human rights.

    This I had not understood fully until after this administration, I had thought they were scum of course, but not like this.

  12. #11

    Default

    Nevermind, forget Ron, Basil Marceaux (dot com) has a 3% favorable rating!


    YouTube - Basil Marceaux with SUBTITLES!
    Last edited by Jordan; 08-12-2010 at 10:31 AM.

  13. #12
    Moderatorus Emeritus Cowlesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    North America
    Posts
    17,015

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jordan View Post
    I'm almost in support of a final "fuck-all" move by Ron as an independent.
    Me too, because if Obama was re-elected, he'd go full-out F everything (gun control, sovereignty reduction) which would make firearms stock skyrocket.
    "Your mother's dead, before long I'll be dead, and you...and your brother and your sister and all of her children, all of us dead, all of us..rotting in the ground. It's the family name that lives on. It's all that lives on. Not your personal glory, not your honor, but family." - Tywin Lannister


  14. #13

    Default

    Talks about him running as a third party won't matter much. He won't run as a third party candidate, end of story. He defended himself very well on his reasons why in his 2008 run, and most of us tended to agree with his reasons. I'm guessing he will just throw his endorsement to a third party candidate again, like he did with Chuck. Except this time, I hope he endorses a good Libertarian Party Presidential candidate.
    Brian Defferding
    Freelance Illustrator
    My Portfolio | www.deftoons.com | Follow Me On Twitter

  15. #14
    Member malkusm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    5,673
    Blog Entries
    10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stary Hickory View Post
    If Ron Paul runs as a third party I will not support him nor forgive him. He will be condemning us to suffer under the HC Bill. There never is a leftist third party challenger only the conservative crowd entertains the idea.

    In fact both times Clinton was able to get elected thanks to Ross Perot a third party candidate. I am glad people here are so apt to be used as political pawns to ensure a leftist win. I however am appalled at what has been done this year, to our economy, to our HC, to our liberties, and the corruption, bailouts, and the bribes and dirty deals.

    I want HC undone, and my freedoms preserved, a 2012 win by any Democrat will not do this for me, nor will there be ANY chance at reigning in government. Obama and his administration are WORSE than Bush and this despite my being apathetic to Obama getting elected because Bush disgusted me so much. I was wrong to be apathetic, I learned that the Democrats are capable of serious crimes against the most basic of human rights.

    This I had not understood fully until after this administration, I had thought they were scum of course, but not like this.
    Yes, because having Mitt Romney win would be SO much better.

  16. #15

    Default

    The only circumstances I can think of for Ron Paul running 3rd party is if he does quite well in the primaries but doesn't quite win (say, he gets 2nd or 3rd) and then gets support of ALL the major 3rd parties (Libertarians, Constitutionalists, etc etc). If that happened, he MIGHT have a shot.

    Otherwise, stick to the primary. Actually, it would be still be great if the Libertarians and Constitutionalists officially endorsed Ron Paul in the primaries and had their members temporarily join the GOP to support him.
    для каждого злодея есть герой

  17. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stary Hickory View Post
    If Ron Paul runs as a third party I will not support him nor forgive him. He will be condemning us to suffer under the HC Bill. There never is a leftist third party challenger only the conservative crowd entertains the idea.

    In fact both times Clinton was able to get elected thanks to Ross Perot a third party candidate. I am glad people here are so apt to be used as political pawns to ensure a leftist win. I however am appalled at what has been done this year, to our economy, to our HC, to our liberties, and the corruption, bailouts, and the bribes and dirty deals.

    I want HC undone, and my freedoms preserved, a 2012 win by any Democrat will not do this for me, nor will there be ANY chance at reigning in government. Obama and his administration are WORSE than Bush and this despite my being apathetic to Obama getting elected because Bush disgusted me so much. I was wrong to be apathetic, I learned that the Democrats are capable of serious crimes against the most basic of human rights.

    This I had not understood fully until after this administration, I had thought they were scum of course, but not like this.
    Clinton got elected because Bush's approval ratings were in the 30s. If Bush had been more popular Perot wouldn't have gotten nearly 20% of the vote. Plus, Perot's votes split equally among Republicans and Democrats, so had he not run, Bill Clinton still would have won by about the same margin. You are also assuming that the GOP candidate will repeal the health care bill if elected, which is doubtful and nearly zero if Romney is the candidate like this scenario uses. As the Bush administration proved, statist Republicans are just as awful as Democrats, so why do you still buy into the false left-right paradigm? I suppose that you voted for Obama in 2008 because you wanted someone to end the wars. That is just as ridiculous as hoping the Republicans will repeal the health care law. Anyway, since this poll shows Ron Paul a mere 2 points shy of participation in the debates, why would you not want to see liberty face against the partisan duopoly?

  18. #17

    Default

    The way it stands now RP will not be president either as a republican or independent. how ever A little threat that he might run as an independent might scare the republican leadership into giving him a power cabinet post to keep his voters in the GOP. I would be tempted to vote for the republican if I knew that RP would be sec state, treasury,chairman of the FED. The republicans cannot dismiss RP again. He carries a lot more political power than in 2008. I would say RP's treatment at the last republican convention lost the GOP 1 to 2 percentage points in the general. RP has a far greater following now and to piss them off like they did last time would cost the GOP even more than this poll shows. This poll does not take into account RP's voters attitudes if RP is once again treated like crap.

  19. #18
    Member malkusm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    5,673
    Blog Entries
    10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by One Last Battle! View Post
    The only circumstances I can think of for Ron Paul running 3rd party is if he does quite well in the primaries but doesn't quite win (say, he gets 2nd or 3rd) and then gets support of ALL the major 3rd parties (Libertarians, Constitutionalists, etc etc). If that happened, he MIGHT have a shot.

    Otherwise, stick to the primary. Actually, it would be still be great if the Libertarians and Constitutionalists officially endorsed Ron Paul in the primaries and had their members temporarily join the GOP to support him.
    The problem is that most states have "sore loser" laws that prevent a candidate from running in a party primary and then later being on the ballot as an Independent candidate. Thus, my strategy of running in Iowa and New Hampshire through the GOP, and dropping out at that point if it doesn't look reasonable for him to win the nomination.

  20. #19
    Moderator jdmyprez_deo_vindice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Eastern Shore of Maryland
    Posts
    5,424
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stary Hickory View Post
    If Ron Paul runs as a third party I will not support him nor forgive him. He will be condemning us to suffer under the HC Bill. There never is a leftist third party challenger only the conservative crowd entertains the idea.

    In fact both times Clinton was able to get elected thanks to Ross Perot a third party candidate. I am glad people here are so apt to be used as political pawns to ensure a leftist win. I however am appalled at what has been done this year, to our economy, to our HC, to our liberties, and the corruption, bailouts, and the bribes and dirty deals.

    I want HC undone, and my freedoms preserved, a 2012 win by any Democrat will not do this for me, nor will there be ANY chance at reigning in government. Obama and his administration are WORSE than Bush and this despite my being apathetic to Obama getting elected because Bush disgusted me so much. I was wrong to be apathetic, I learned that the Democrats are capable of serious crimes against the most basic of human rights.

    This I had not understood fully until after this administration, I had thought they were scum of course, but not like this.
    And do you really believe that Ron allowing someone like Mitt to walk away with the Presidency would really make things all that different? They may look different but the vast majority of the Republican Party and the Obama party are essentially one and the same anymore. I will NEVER tow the party line and just vote Republican under the false assumption that one of the two parties is actually looking out for us. If you believe that than you are delusional because Republican or Democrat, this crap is NEVER going away until we the people either rise up or gain the collective intelligence required to do something amazing like send a Ron Paul to the White House.
    "Governor, if I had foreseen the use those people
    designed to make of their victory,
    there would have been no surrender at
    Appomattox Courthouse; no sir, not by me.
    Had I foreseen these results of subjugation,
    I would have preferred to die at Appomattox
    with my brave men, my sword in my right hand." - Robert E. Lee to Governor Fletcher S. Stockdale (D-Texas), 1870


  21. #20

    Default

    Mitt Romney is not going to be the Republican nominee. I'm not even sure he's going to run. The other candidates will point to the disaster of government healthcare in Massachusetts. Considering most Republicans despise government-run healthcare, Romney doesn't stand a chance.

    Huckabee is loved by the Christian "right", but not much by those who put economics ahead of social conservatism. Plus, his wishy-washyness on illegal immigration turns off many other conservatives.

    Palin can fire up the non-Paul tea-party crowd, but speaks in generalities rather than policy ideas. She could pull a large percentage early, but when challenged, she'll look ill-prepared and someone else will rise...

    Unfortunately, that person is Newt. He's the problem. There's no way he can even be competitive against Obama, but he can easily win the GOP nomination. This is the scary thing.

    I think it's entirely possible for a Paul Ryan, Michelle Bachmann, or Jim DeMint to beat Obama, but I doubt they'll run. Outside of them, the only Republican who's even been mentioned that could beat Obama is Ron Paul. I think he's the only Republican who can get the so-called Reagan Democrats to vote for a Republican again.

    Running third-party condemns the United States to a totalitarian sociiety until the armed rebellion.
    "You and I have a rendezvous with destiny. We will preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on Earth, or we will sentence them to take the last step into a thousand years of darkness." -- Ronald Reagan, 1964



  22. #21
    Moderator jdmyprez_deo_vindice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Eastern Shore of Maryland
    Posts
    5,424
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NCGOPer_for_Paul View Post
    Mitt Romney is not going to be the Republican nominee. I'm not even sure he's going to run. The other candidates will point to the disaster of government healthcare in Massachusetts. Considering most Republicans despise government-run healthcare, Romney doesn't stand a chance.
    Are these the same Republicans that love their medicare/medicaid and whose little small government heart race with joy when it is social security check day?

    The GOP as it stands now will not save you and will NOT reverse course for the damage that Obama has done. They will talk a good game but when it comes down to it these abuses of power will remain in place.
    "Governor, if I had foreseen the use those people
    designed to make of their victory,
    there would have been no surrender at
    Appomattox Courthouse; no sir, not by me.
    Had I foreseen these results of subjugation,
    I would have preferred to die at Appomattox
    with my brave men, my sword in my right hand." - Robert E. Lee to Governor Fletcher S. Stockdale (D-Texas), 1870


  23. #22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by South Park Fan View Post
    Clinton got elected because Bush's approval ratings were in the 30s. If Bush had been more popular Perot wouldn't have gotten nearly 20% of the vote. Plus, Perot's votes split equally among Republicans and Democrats, so had he not run, Bill Clinton still would have won by about the same margin. You are also assuming that the GOP candidate will repeal the health care bill if elected, which is doubtful and nearly zero if Romney is the candidate like this scenario uses. As the Bush administration proved, statist Republicans are just as awful as Democrats, so why do you still buy into the false left-right paradigm? I suppose that you voted for Obama in 2008 because you wanted someone to end the wars. That is just as ridiculous as hoping the Republicans will repeal the health care law. Anyway, since this poll shows Ron Paul a mere 2 points shy of participation in the debates, why would you not want to see liberty face against the partisan duopoly?
    No this is the way you like to spin it or what you have heard, Perot appealed to conservatives in masse. And do not forget that the majority of Independents vote GOP, something you are omitting here.

    My entire family and my cousins....everyone I know back home vote GOP and none of them are registered Republicans. Please do not attempt to be disingenuous, Perot was NOT a Democratic candidate.

  24. #23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stary Hickory View Post
    No this is the way you like to spin it or what you have heard, Perot appealed to conservatives in masse. And do not forget that the majority of Independents vote GOP, something you are omitting here.

    My entire family and my cousins....everyone I know back home vote GOP and none of them are registered Republicans. Please do not attempt to be disingenuous, Perot was NOT a Democratic candidate.
    I have to agree. Everybody I know that voted for Perot always voted R not D.

  25. #24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jdmyprez_deo_vindice View Post
    Are these the same Republicans that love their medicare/medicaid and whose little small government heart race with joy when it is social security check day?

    The GOP as it stands now will not save you and will NOT reverse course for the damage that Obama has done. They will talk a good game but when it comes down to it these abuses of power will remain in place.
    They will take down the HC bill and they will reduce the size of government. Liberty candidates are popping up in the ranks of the GOP like crazy. Their very political future depends on reducing government, repealling HC and reigning in government and it's scope.

    They won't do it with Democrats holding any of the houses or the presidency though. People like to bash Reagan, but had he had a GOP congress and senate he would have done quite a bit to make the country less government heavy. I want an improvement, to see progress in the opposite direction, I want relief from this growing nightmare....there is ZERO chance that Democrats will do this, there is a good chance that the GOP could. There is ZERO chance of Paul winning as an indepenednt and a 100% chance that, if he runs, he would ensure another Obama win.

    There are not any options if you want to see positive change of any kind via government. To increase the odds, I also support states rights and civil disobedience. Whatever it takes, including secession.

  26. #25

    Default

    Ron Paul is the only active Republican in office... the rest are has-beens.

    Frankly, Newt with those numbers... where does PPP hold their polls?

    Yeah, results on he 1992 election, here's the best breakout site on elections: http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/n...?f=0&year=1992
    The American Dream, Wake Up People, This is our country! <===click

    "All eyes are opened, or opening to the rights of man, let the annual return of this day(July 4th), forever refresh our recollections of these rights, and an undiminished devotion to them."
    Thomas Jefferson
    June 1826



    Rock The World!
    USAF Veteran

  27. #26

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stary Hickory View Post
    No this is the way you like to spin it or what you have heard, Perot appealed to conservatives in masse. And do not forget that the majority of Independents vote GOP, something you are omitting here.

    My entire family and my cousins....everyone I know back home vote GOP and none of them are registered Republicans. Please do not attempt to be disingenuous, Perot was NOT a Democratic candidate.
    That's correct. Perot may have taken 1% away from Clinton, maybe.

    Conservatives HATED Bush. Remember, Pat Buchanan ran against Bush in Republican primaries in '92 and pulled 25-35% against a sitting President. Many of these people voted Perot, and would have never voted for Clinton...who knows, maybe Andre Marrou would have cracked 1 million votes...

    Bush wins the '92 election by 5-6 points without Perot in the race.
    "You and I have a rendezvous with destiny. We will preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on Earth, or we will sentence them to take the last step into a thousand years of darkness." -- Ronald Reagan, 1964



  28. #27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HOLLYWOOD View Post
    Ron Paul is the only active Republican in office... the rest are has-beens.

    Frankly, Newt with those numbers... where does PPP hold their polls?

    Yeah, results on he 1992 election, here's the best breakout site on elections: http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/n...?f=0&year=1992
    There is not one exciting GOP candidate yet besides Ron Paul. All of them have establishment GOP written all over them. I think Rand Paul might be up for the challenge. I am sure he will be POTUS sooner or later, but we may have to call him up from the minor leagues sooner than planned...the GOP starting lineup is krap.

  29. #28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HOLLYWOOD View Post
    Ron Paul is the only active Republican in office... the rest are has-beens.

    Frankly, Newt with those numbers... where does PPP hold their polls?

    Yeah, results on he 1992 election, here's the best breakout site on elections: http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/n...?f=0&year=1992
    Yeah, Newt with those numbers.

    In my estimation, Newt Gingrich is the GOP front runner for 2012.

    He's the best politician of the bunch. He can run on fighting Clinton and the Contract With America. Unfortunately, the majority of the true belivers of that group got drummed out of the mainstream of the GOP.

    He's making a bigger spalsh right now raising money for a bill in Congress basically rolling back Obama's plans. He'll use that to springboard a run. He has regular Republicans mesmerized.
    "You and I have a rendezvous with destiny. We will preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on Earth, or we will sentence them to take the last step into a thousand years of darkness." -- Ronald Reagan, 1964



  30. #29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stary Hickory View Post
    If Ron Paul runs as a third party I will not support him nor forgive him.
    What is difference between Romney and Obama?
    What is difference between Democratic Party and Republican Party?
    A Camel, Lion, and Child.

  31. #30

    Default

    People need to get over this 3rd party nonsense.

    The general public votes to keep people OUT of office, not to get them IN. They are chicken shits for a 3rd party.

    Ron needs to Republican or nothing.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast




« Previous Thread | Next Thread »


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •