Romney now more disliked than Clinton - The Orange Mane

Bronco Bob · 08-22-2007, 12:18 PM

Romney Encounters More Core Opposition Than Clinton

Wednesday, August 22, 2007

Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney has finally surpassed New York Senator Hillary Clinton in the polls. Unfortunately for Romney, it’s a poll measuring the number of people committing to vote against him.

The Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 44% of Likely Voters would definitely vote against Romney if he’s on the ballot in 2008. That’s a point higher than the 43% who would definitely vote against Clinton. Only one other possible candidate surpassed Clinton in this category all year (former House Speaker Newt Gingrich who is not considered a candidate at this time).

It’s worth noting that Clinton’s core opposition is a bit smaller than it was earlier in the year (see last month’s report). It’s also worth noting that 50% of men will definitely vote against her. Thirty-seven percent (37%) of women share that view.

The five other leading contenders for the White House have from 33% to 38% of voters committed to voting against them. Former Tennessee Senator Fred Thompson is at the low end of that list with core opposition of 33%. Former North Carolina Senator John Edwards is at 38% (see trends for all candidates).

Looking at things from the positive perspective and measuring core support, Clinton tops all candidates. Thirty-three percent (33%) would definitely vote for her. Twenty-nine percent (29%) say the same about Barack Obama while 26% are committed to voting for Rudy Giuliani.

On a net basis (core support minus core opposition) Obama comes out on top at minus 6 (29 for, 35 against). He is followed by Clinton at minus 10 (33 for, 43 against), Giuliani at minus 11 (26 for, 37 against), and Thompson at minus 13 (20 for, 33 against). These four candidates also lead the polls for their own party nomination.

In terms of partisan reaction, it’s interesting to note that 25% of Republicans say they would definitely vote against Romney while 22% of Democrats would vote against Edwards.

Among unaffiliated voters, 44% say they will definitely vote against Clinton and 41% say the same about Romney.

Clinton does a better job of uniting Republicans than any other candidate. Seventy-six percent (76%) of the GOP faithful say they’ll definitely vote against the former First Lady. Only 61% of Republicans say the same about Obama and Edwards.

Sixty-three percent (63%) of Democrats say they’ll definitely vote against Romney.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ...n_than_clinton

Spider · 08-22-2007, 05:15 PM

meh ...... 2 weeks and the #'s will change .......

Garcia Bronco · 08-22-2007, 05:33 PM

Given the margins in place...they are all really reporting everything as dead even. Plus Halo effects...they are what they generally are....worthless.

Bob · 08-23-2007, 02:33 PM

Yes, Hilary is loved by all -- say it over and over for her benefit...why do we have to hear a two year commercial by the alphabet-soup networks promoting their boy/girl under the pretense of "news?"

Insert: Romney, Thompson, Hucklebee -- who ever has momentum will become the new whipping-boy full of scandle

Bronco Bob · 08-23-2007, 02:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bob

Yes, Hilary is loved by all -- say it over and over for her benefit...why do we have to hear a two year commercial by the alphabet-soup networks promoting their boy/girl under the pretense of "news?"

And I hate the Raiders so I must love the Chiefs, using that logic.

Bob · 08-23-2007, 03:09 PM

Well, no -- but look at even the debates -- when was the last time that the debate of the Republicans moderated by a conservative? they had Steve Anglopulius (sp) moderate one, and other recent one was by someone who was left of center -- so are they going to ask questions that are going to reflect there own liberal slant, and focus on issues that conservatives give a rip about?

I would love to implement a real fairness doctrine…

Bronco Bob · 08-23-2007, 05:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bob

Well, no -- but look at even the debates -- when was the last time that the debate of the Republicans moderated by a conservative? they had Steve Anglopulius (sp) moderate one, and other recent one was by someone who was left of center -- so are they going to ask questions that are going to reflect there own liberal slant, and focus on issues that conservatives give a rip about?

I watch some of those two debates and I didn't see Romney get ripped
any more than any of the other Republicans. And Fox News is supposed
to be holding a debate sometime. Do you think Fox going to be
tossing rose petals at Romney and bricks at the rest of the GOP candidates?
So I'm not sure what the debates have to do with Romney's high negatives,
other than more people getting a chance to see him talking and not
liking what he says.

Quote:

I would love to implement a real fairness doctrine…

But wouldn't that mean that Fox News would have to hire real liberals
like Al Franken and Micheal Moore? Instead of people like Sean Hannity's
punching bag Alan Colmes.

Bob · 08-24-2007, 03:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bronco Bob

I watch some of those two debates and I didn't see Romney get ripped
any more than any of the other Republicans. And Fox News is supposed
to be holding a debate sometime. Do you think Fox going to be
tossing rose petals at Romney and bricks at the rest of the GOP candidates?
So I'm not sure what the debates have to do with Romney's high negatives,
other than more people getting a chance to see him talking and not
liking what he says.

But wouldn't that mean that Fox News would have to hire real liberals
like Al Franken and Micheal Moore? Instead of people like Sean Hannity's
punching bag Alan Colmes.

You don’t support your argument well here as you are not concerned with truth. The Dems have boycotted the Fox debates – why? Oh, yes a statement of some type to communicate that they don’t hold them as legitimate purveyors of news? Give me a freaking break -- its like they are unwilling to even acknowledge that conservatives even exist.

I will trade you one Fox, for CNN, CBS, ABC, NBC, and NPR.

If Moore and Al are "real liberals" then you have got your work cut out for you...

Bronco Bob · 08-24-2007, 11:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bob

You don’t support your argument well here as you are not concerned with truth. The Dems have boycotted the Fox debates – why? Oh, yes a statement of some type to communicate that they don’t hold them as legitimate purveyors of news? Give me a freaking break -- its like they are unwilling to even acknowledge that conservatives even exist.

Because everyone but the right wingers know that FOX "NEWS" is basically the RNC propaganda machine.

Quote:

I will trade you one Fox, for CNN, CBS, ABC, NBC, and NPR.

I wouldn't take FOX "NEWS" if you threw 77 virgins into the deal.

Quote:

If Moore and Al are "real liberals" then you have got your work cut out for you...

I would love to see Bill Mahar sitting across from Sean Hannity.
Now there would be something worth watching.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN · 08-24-2007, 06:43 PM

08-22-2007, 12:18 PM	#1
Bronco Bob Tastee Freeze Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 9,464 Adopt-a-Bronco: Champ Bailey	Romney now more disliked than Clinton Romney Encounters More Core Opposition Than Clinton Wednesday, August 22, 2007 Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney has finally surpassed New York Senator Hillary Clinton in the polls. Unfortunately for Romney, it’s a poll measuring the number of people committing to vote against him. The Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 44% of Likely Voters would definitely vote against Romney if he’s on the ballot in 2008. That’s a point higher than the 43% who would definitely vote against Clinton. Only one other possible candidate surpassed Clinton in this category all year (former House Speaker Newt Gingrich who is not considered a candidate at this time). It’s worth noting that Clinton’s core opposition is a bit smaller than it was earlier in the year (see last month’s report). It’s also worth noting that 50% of men will definitely vote against her. Thirty-seven percent (37%) of women share that view. The five other leading contenders for the White House have from 33% to 38% of voters committed to voting against them. Former Tennessee Senator Fred Thompson is at the low end of that list with core opposition of 33%. Former North Carolina Senator John Edwards is at 38% (see trends for all candidates). Looking at things from the positive perspective and measuring core support, Clinton tops all candidates. Thirty-three percent (33%) would definitely vote for her. Twenty-nine percent (29%) say the same about Barack Obama while 26% are committed to voting for Rudy Giuliani. On a net basis (core support minus core opposition) Obama comes out on top at minus 6 (29 for, 35 against). He is followed by Clinton at minus 10 (33 for, 43 against), Giuliani at minus 11 (26 for, 37 against), and Thompson at minus 13 (20 for, 33 against). These four candidates also lead the polls for their own party nomination. In terms of partisan reaction, it’s interesting to note that 25% of Republicans say they would definitely vote against Romney while 22% of Democrats would vote against Edwards. Among unaffiliated voters, 44% say they will definitely vote against Clinton and 41% say the same about Romney. Clinton does a better job of uniting Republicans than any other candidate. Seventy-six percent (76%) of the GOP faithful say they’ll definitely vote against the former First Lady. Only 61% of Republicans say the same about Obama and Edwards. Sixty-three percent (63%) of Democrats say they’ll definitely vote against Romney. http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ...n_than_clinton

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

08-22-2007, 05:15 PM	#2
Spider Mr Diplomacy I survived Tebow Mania at the Mane Join Date: May 2001 Location: Elway was just an arm =MacGruder Posts: 84,438 Adopt-a-Bronco: Von Miller	meh ...... 2 weeks and the #'s will change .......

08-22-2007, 05:33 PM	#3
Garcia Bronco Hokie since 1993 Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Denver, CO Posts: 45,991 Adopt-a-Bronco: Tom Jackson	Given the margins in place...they are all really reporting everything as dead even. Plus Halo effects...they are what they generally are....worthless.

08-23-2007, 02:33 PM	#4
Bob Ring of Famer Join Date: May 2001 Posts: 5,330	Yes, Hilary is loved by all -- say it over and over for her benefit...why do we have to hear a two year commercial by the alphabet-soup networks promoting their boy/girl under the pretense of "news?" Insert: Romney, Thompson, Hucklebee -- who ever has momentum will become the new whipping-boy full of scandle

08-23-2007, 03:09 PM	#6
Bob Ring of Famer Join Date: May 2001 Posts: 5,330	Well, no -- but look at even the debates -- when was the last time that the debate of the Republicans moderated by a conservative? they had Steve Anglopulius (sp) moderate one, and other recent one was by someone who was left of center -- so are they going to ask questions that are going to reflect there own liberal slant, and focus on issues that conservatives give a rip about? I would love to implement a real fairness doctrine…

08-24-2007, 06:43 PM	#10
L.A. BRONCOS FAN Mo' holla fo' yo' dolla! Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: In a bunker in an undisclosed location Posts: 52,694