A Reuters/Ipsos poll of registered GOP voters released today shows that Newt Gingrich is in the lead at 24 percent. Mitt Romney is right behind at 22 percent. The other candidates polling in the double digits are Herman Cain (12 percent) and Rick Perry (10 percent).
Forty-six percent of Republicans don’t care that Gingrich was paid up to $1.8 million by Freddie Mac in the 2000s for consulting, while 31 percent do. When all Americans are polled, 20 percent believe that Gingrich didn’t lobby for Freddie Mac (he has said he did no lobbying for them), while 37 percent believe he did do lobbying for Freddie.
Interesting to see Perry back into double digits, albeit slimly. Is he receiving a Newt-onian double-take now that Cain is fading? Romney still can't close the sale. 70% of Republicans do not want him to be the nominee. If he fights and loses in Iowa, NH might look pretty dicey.
Time for several of these * candidates to bow out. Many are good Conservatives, and if they love their country they will realize that all they are accomplishing is ensuring a non-Conservative gets elected in 2012. Some of these folks are putting ego before country.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI disagree.
Republican primary voters deserve choices... As many choices.
In fact, I don't see the problem with multiple Republican candidates continuing right into the general.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseTell you what, in the spirit of OWS, and its core Marxist bent, what we need is to "spread the wealth around" with an Obama primary challenger.
Your man is in really, really bad shape with no prospect if improvement...
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseMitt Romney really isn't that close. Where would the vast majority of Cain's 12% and Perry's 10% go if those two weren't in the race? To the Not-Romney candidate (in this case, Gingrich). Guaranteed. In a sense, Romney has always been losing to the Tea Party forces (Perry, Cain, Gingrich, Bachmann) by a margin of 46% to 22%. If there was only one candidate in opposition to Romney, that person would easily destroy Romney; and Romney's strategy, such as it is, always involved the juvenile tact of hoping the other candidates divide enough of the pie to leave him with the majority.
Isn't it interesting that any time there's a new flavor of the month candidate, that individual ALWAYS rockets ahead of Romney. Always.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseTrump, Bachmann, Perry, Cain and now Newt (the current turd du jour).
What Obama lacks in ability he more than makes up for in blind luck.
Long term it might be best that Obama gets a second term. As the super committee farce demonstrates, neither party is worth a tinker's dang (NR censor) and nothing will be fixed until there is a collapse.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe best candidate to fix the government ruined by insiders and policy wonks is to elect an insider and policy wonk who was feeding at the trough. Truly a bold stand by GOPers supporting Newt.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThis is really alarming. Newt is not conservative. Newt is not electable. Newt remains a comical, petulant figure in the public's mind -- by no means a president. In his very public moral shortcomings, Newt has the baggage of a Skid Row junkie.
We have got be kidding ourselves if we think we really need to keep getting distracted by non-starter candidates like Perry or Gingrich. These people aren't electable, and they aren't conservative (Gingrich is to the left of Romney on entitlements where he rejects the Ryan plan, illegal immigration, subsidies for connected businesses, cap'n'trade, the Fairness Doctrine, etc).
Romney is both conservative and electable, and passing him over for Gingrich is gouging your eyes to spite your face.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAlthough I like Gingrich, this poll shows a real problem with Newt. 37% blieved he lobbied? What are the odds that 37% even heard that he was paid by Freddie? I would guess that only 20% of Americans had even heard of this story, yet 37% were ready to believe it. That indicates some very serious issues with preconcieved negatives for Newt.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"Forty-six percent of Republicans don’t care that Gingrich was paid up to $1.8 million by Freddie Mac in the 2000s for consulting, while 31 percent do."
Well, that is a sign these are not genuine Republican voters, or serious conservatives.
The poll probably includes many who won't actually be voting, or the conservative movement is continuing to decline.
No one who is a true conservative would not be at least a little "concerned" with a Beltway Insider's addiction to the Public Sector payroll.
Gingrich actually jumped to appear in ads with Nancy Pelosi pushing Global Warming nonsense, has no genuine private sector or CEO experience, and once was forced to resign in disgrace from the Speaker's position.
It would be insane to give the Democratic Partisans a gift like this, and nominate a predictable loser like Newt Gingrich for the Presidency.
Insane...
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI agree OldFan, and I hope the GOP is not that stupid to even consider such a buffoon as Gingrich.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAnd you know and I know that the fact that it is INSANE is precisely why it is likely to happen.
I love Republican primaries.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIt was an online poll of 1432 adults, of which 29% were registered Republicans. This has to be THEE lowest standard of a poll I have season this primary season. It is a far cry from Rasmussen's "likely primary voters".
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseYou mean the Rasmussen poll that shows Gingrich in the lead?
External Link
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThis poll is proof that 20% of people are absolutely crazy.
Yeah, I am sure that Newt was paid $1.8 million to talk about the transcontinental railroad.
Mwahahahahaha.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseOnline poll?
The National Review is now writing stories on online polls?
We Ron Paul supporters would be delighted to furnish you with urls for any number of online polls......
What makes this one special?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWhy is National Review now posting results of internet online surveys?
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse