Hmmm . . .
Should we be surprised that Democrats are more pleased with an Obama-Romney match-up than Republicans are?
There’s been little serious talk of any primary challenge to Obama, so Democrats have known, and come to expect, Obama would be their nominee for years. Perhaps they’re satisfied because they think Romney will be easy to beat.
Republicans, meanwhile, are still selecting their nominee, and while Romney remains the frontrunner, a significant number probably prefer Gingrich, Santorum, or Paul. Those folks probably make up a good chunk of that 37 percent who describe themselves as dissatisfied with this match-up.
Gallup also asked whether voters were certain or likely to vote for Obama or Romney.
Among registered voters, 35 percent said they were certain or likely to vote for Obama, 32 percent said they were certain or likely to vote for Romney. Among the Democrats, 83 percent say they’re certain or likely to vote for Obama, while 69 percent of Republicans say they’re certain or likely to vote for Romney. As ominous as that seems, 27 percent of independents say they’re certain or likely to vote for Romney, only 22 percent say they’re certain or likely to vote for Obama.
It's also possible that some Democrats like the match-up because they are disenchanted with Obama and want a Republican they can actually vote for. Yes, this is an optimistic way of looking at it, but I would think there are a fair number of Democrats who aren't impressed with Obama and do want to see a Republican win if that Republican doesn't scare them---the Ed Koch sort of Democrat, you could say.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI was thinking along the same lines, but slightly different. Not that they want to vote for someone other than Obama, but if their guy loses who would they rather the winner be.
It may be they're more satisfied not because they think they could beat Romney more easily, but they would rather see Romney as President than say Gingrich or Paul if their guy happens to lose.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWhy wouldn't they be pleased? Especially now that Grindgrinch is pursuing his OWS attack on Mitt Romney in particular, and capitalism in general. Add to that the Ron Paul looniness, and it's a Republican Primary beyond the wildest hopes of the Democrats. Cordially, Bill
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI think mcgruff is right. In the ultra-leftist areas where I hang out, I can hear disenchantment with Obama. Those are the folks who had no specific attachment to him in 2008 (that is, not black, not members of any radical cause, just generally "progressive" because all their friends are). They voted against McCain (pseudo-Bush), and for the novelty of Obama. They talk progressive but are not afraid to call Occupy a bunch of bums.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseLiberals have probably zeroed in on Romney as definitively the "weakest link" between Romney and Gingrich. They have been pushing Romney as "the most electable" as much as the establishment Repulicans--collectively both groups singled out Romney as their candidate of choice early on and have been force feeding him on the public ever since. They still refer to him as the "front runner" when he came up short in Iowa and has Gingrich usurping his South Carolina lead. It's pitiful and is why neither politicians, nor the media, have any credibility with the public. They run the opposite direction from a "mover and shaker" who threatens to upset their self-important, self-serving group-think persona. What both politicians and media say in front of a camera or in print is an attempted deflection from anything resembling the truth--How else would they justify their existence if problems were solved and solutions implemented. Answer: Nobody needs them and they know nobody needs them!
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseRomney as a candidate looks he has been designed in a lab by Obama’s campaign consultants who have decided to run a campaign of class warfare on the super rich:
- Super rich Wall Street guy
- Supports bailouts for Wall Street – but not for US automakers
- Worth hundreds of millions of dollars mostly made by managing money and dismantling companies
- Pays a much smaller tax rate than his secretary, driver, and house help – not only on his investment income, but also on his salary/compensation as a money manager.
- Uses Caiman Island accounts to keep his money
Also – since Obamacare looks like the most important issue for Republicans, the designed candidate should not be able to attack Obama on it – ideally you want someone who has devised and implemented the individual health care mandates (Romneycare) that Obama based his on! Thus Obamacare is off the table!
Throw in as an added bonus complete disconnect with the regular people. Make the designed candidate says things like:
- “We should discuss tax policy in quiet rooms” outside of the public view
- “$370,000/year is a small amount of money”
- “let’s bet $10,000” on trivial things
- “I come from the real streets of America”
- “I like to be able to fire people”
- “I have worried several times about getting a pink slip”
- “Like you, I am also currently unemployed”
- “Yes I transport my dog in a cage strapped to the top of my car – but the dog does not mind”
If you really, really want to make a perfect candidate – make him also a flip-flopper who does not seem to have any core beliefs, and will say anything and will take any position to be elected for whatever he is running.
Romney is the absolute perfect candidate for Obama to run against. Also Romney as a candidate 100% ensures that carried interest (the way Romney made his money) will be taxed at regular income rates next year, the capital gains and divident tax rates will go up next year, and the Bush tax cuts will not be renewed. Not only Romney will lose to Obama, but there surely are large tax increases coming if he is the candidate!
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseNot sure what that means unless I see the data on the same question for Gingrich, Santorum and Paul.
Otherwise it is pure speculation.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse35% of registered voters saying they're certain to vote for the incumbent president is not reason for clicking of of heels by Obamaites. And registered voters tend to poll more leftist than likely voters. 69% of Republicans saying they would definitely vote for Romney needs to be viewed in the context that maybe 30% of Republicans say they will vote for Romney in the primaries. Did they really get the full context of the Gallup question as to whether they would vote for him, regardless of their preference now, in the fall election?
Obama looks beatable, even in this silly poll with its ambiguous questions. He should look much more beatable, but he has a remarkably dimwitted foe in the Republican leadership in the House and Senate to beat up on to help prop himself up with. The question is whether any Republican will exploit his vulnerabilities (does anyone remember Obamacare, for instance?) or will instead try to run a "safe" campaign, ala Bush/McCain mode, and hand the country four more years of Obama.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseCount me as another who thinks that a lot of Democrats unhappy with Obama would be happy knowing his loss would be a Romney Presidency rather than a Newt one. Maybe they vote for Romney as a side bonus. Maybe not.
I don't see this at all as indicative they think Romney would be easier to beat. What possible reason could they have for thinking that anyway? Certainly not the polls which show Romney well ahead of other GOPs in the head to head.
No, I think this is more proof of the unpopularity of Obama.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseExternal Link
I have issues with Newt and his women, most notably Newt endorsing Dede Scozzafava over Doug Hoffman and cuddling on the couch with Nancy Pelosi.
And the alternative? I think Dan Collins may be right on what is the matter with Rick Santorum. External Link
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse