There may be a lesson in the results of our monthly 2012 Presidential poll: the less angry a Republican you are the better you do against Barack Obama.
Mike Huckabee is the only possible GOP contender polling ahead of Obama this month, at 47/44. Going from arguably most pleasant to most angry across the spectrum of leading Republicans you then have Obama ahead of Mitt Romney 46-43, Newt Gingrich 47-43, Sarah Palin 49-43, and Glenn Beck 48-39.
Huckabee is the only candidate we polled this month to post positive favorability numbers, at 35/32. That's because he's relatively inoffensive to Democrats with only 44% having an unfavorable opinion of him. Mitt Romney's favorability numbers are only slightly negative at 33/35. The rest of the GOP folks are highly unpopular with Beck's favorability at 31/41, Palin's at 38/52, and Gingrich's at 30/50.
We also asked generally whether people would vote for Obama in 2012 or vote for his Republican opponent and that came out dead even at 47%. Those numbers tell us 2 things: 1) that Romney, Gingrich, and Palin are all weaker than a generic GOP nominee and 2) that it may be a little premature to write Obama's political obituary given that he's running even at a very, very bad time for his party.
Another interesting thing about this month's numbers is that among the serious GOP hopefuls the better known they are the worst they do against Obama. Huckabee has the lowest name recognition but the best horse race numbers while Palin has the highest name recognition and the worst horse race numbers.
Going deeper on Beck's favorability numbers he's viewed favorably by Republicans at 59/14 but negatively by Democrats at 11/60 and also by independents at 24/52. Beck's numbers with indys make Palin look like Ms. Popularity in comparison- 34% have a favorable opinion of her.
The takeaway from this poll is about the same as every month- Obama's pretty weak but his likely opposition is pretty darn weak too and particularly in the cases of Gingrich and Palin weaker than him.
Full results here
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
13 comments:
as if it's not a righteous indignation against the evils and tyrannies and dangers of the radical left's agenda...
Since Obama and the radical socialist Democrats have seized power (by falsely campaigning as moderates), America has grown more uncomfortable with the Democrats' ideology and more comfortable with Republicans' ideology.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/139877/Near-Record-Say-Democratic-Party-Liberal.aspx
The incumbent Obama never gets 50% support. And every Republican is within single digits of Obama without the trappings of office nor a large coordinated campaign. Obama already is more vulnerable than Jimmy Carter ever was until the final October.
Two things I see in these poll results: 1. Huckabee's edge is due to African Americans having a neutral opinion of him. 2. I don't believe Obama is leading by double digits with 65 and older. I don't buy that.
I hope this is a portent of things to come in 2012.
If Mike Huckabee chooses to run, he will be the president future candidates promise to emulate. I wish the elitist GOP power brokers had had the sense to support him in 2008.
"I don't believe Obama is leading by double digits with 65 and older."
We'll just have to remind seniors that Obamacare raided Medicare and forced their children into debt slavery, all to increase bureaucrats' control over our healthcare. And once government is in charge of healthcare, quality inevitably declines. If Democrats haven't supported a repeal of Obamacare yet, they're going to wish they had.
It still boils down to electoral votes and my guess is Obama would have the lead there. Huck isn't going to win CA, NY or IL, maybe Florida. Anyway it will be tough for them to take out Obama with the group they have running.
I recognized Mike Huckabee's attributes back in 2007 and I continue to support him.
Oh, how I enjoy reading Christian Liberty's (an oxymoron if there ever was one) posts here.
It's like peeking into the wingnut abyss.
Huckabee beats Obama 47-44 and your title for the post is The Monthly 2012. You're kidding right? No post stating Huckabee beats Obama, all others lose? And then your next post is Romney up big in NH? What's up with that?
I noticed there were no tweets about Huckabee beating Obama either. Just more of the same about Republicans being weak. Are you trying to hide the fact that Huckabee beat Obama?
Huckabee has his ear to the tracks when it comes to the little guy's pain, and his eye to the future when it comes to the country's economic health. He's a great communicator to boot. Small surprise that he beats Obama, whose ideology has blinded him to the macro-economy engine needs and has brought more Americans below the poverty level than ever before. Yeah, I think I like Mike.
How about Chris Christie?
I really don't care for any of the above . . . although I love Sarah . . .
"Huckabee beats Obama 47-44 and your title for the post is The Monthly 2012. You're kidding right? No post stating Huckabee beats Obama, all others lose?"
That's essentially the headline I wrote for our press release, which is linked in the post. But the others have been up on Obama in other months too. It's not as if Huck is the first candidate to beat Obama in one of our national polls. It's not breaking news.
"How about Chris Christie?"
He was our bonus Republican last month. Wasn't very well known, and didn't do even as well as Beck because of that.
"It still boils down to electoral votes and my guess is Obama would have the lead there."
I plan to check on that in the near future, actually. I have a plot showing that a President's approval rating is directly proportional to the share of the electoral vote he takes in (as well as the popular vote, of course).
the majority of voters agree that their views are more like Sarah Palin's than Obama's.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/september_2010/52_of_voters_say_their_views_are_more_like_palin_s_than_obama_s
Post a Comment