RSS Feed Menu
President Obama would beat two top contenders for the Republican nomination in 2012 by a wide margin, a new poll found Thursday.
The president would beat former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney (R) by nine percentage points, and best former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty (R) by 19 points if the election were held today, according to a new NBC/Wall Street Journal poll.
Forty-nine percent of registered voters would elect Obama and 40 percent would choose Romney in a matchup between the two. Five percent were undecided, and six percent would prefer another candidate.
Obama would beat Pawlenty, 50-31 percent. Ten percent were undecided, nine percent said it depends, and six percent would vote for a different candidate.
Republicans actually fare better at this early point in the cycle with a generic candidate on the ballot. Forty-five percent of registered voters like Obama against a generic Republican, who would get 40 percent of the vote.
To an extent, Obama’s early advantage reflects the fact that the race for president in 2012 hasn’t formally gotten underway. Neither Romney nor Pawlenty have announced their candidacies, though both are expected to run.
Poll: Obama Leads Romney, Pawlenty
Recent Posts by FrumForum News
- Applebaum: Can the Brits Learn Bipartisanship?
- House Votes for FinReg Bill
- NRA Might Endorse Harry Reid
- Economic Recovery Slows Down
- Rand Paul: U.S. is Like Roman Empire
The REALLY interesting poll from yesterday was the PPP analysis of Virginia. If the Republican candidate can’t take Virginia, what chance does he have? Well, the poll found that Obama is running at or AHEAD of his result in 2008:
“Obama leads Mitt Romney by 6 points in the state at 48-42. That’s identical to the size of his victory over John McCain in 2008. After that his leads increase to 8 points over Mike Huckabee at 51-43, 12 over Newt Gingrich at 51-39, and a whooping 19 over Sarah Palin at 54-35.”
http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2011/03/obama-strong-in-virginia.html
The fact that 35% of anyone would vote for Sarah Palin for president shows how utterly hopeless this country has become.
AMEN!
I wonder what the poll numbers would be if they asked other random questions, though.
Do you play the lottery every week with a “strategy”?
Do you believe that the resources of your state belong to the individual landowners or the entire state?
Would you support or oppose allowing the government to determine which religions are “safe” for our country?
Do you think a state should tax its natural resources at a higher rate so that those proceeds can be paid back to each and every resident of the state?
Would you support a bill that would allow government entities to determine religious groups’ eligibility for building permits based on public perception of the religion?
Do you think Sarah Palin writes her own Facebook updates?
Would you support a close friend or family member who chose to join a secessionist organization?
A Fox News poll, which is absorbed by many more people, would disagree.
Absurd source.
Please do not reproduce.
Even if you can somehow find a desperate woman who would have anything to do with you.
You belong on HuffPo only. There, the mods get points for banning anyone who is not a left wing idealogue. Now, shoo.
So let me get this straight: a poll from FOX (likely run by Rasmussen which has been proven to have a clear Republican bias) would be more accurate than an NBC/WSJ poll?
oooookayyyyy…
I think ‘conservatives four palin’ coffee mugs can be bought at their site. Grab me a t-shirt. I will vote for your queen!
As a baseline of stupidity in this country, I like the Washington Post Poll from January, 2009.
After two unfunded wars, the biggest single increase in entitlement obligations ever (also unfunded), the creation of an entire new cabinet level department (also unfunded), a budget in surplus turned into a budget with a record deficit, 4.5 MILLION jobs lost in little more than a year, the economy in the worst crisis since the Great Depression, and the entire financial system on the verge of collapse – WaPo found that 33% of those polled still had a favorable opinion of George W. Bush.
“Bush finishes his term with a 49 percent approval rating among white evangelical Protestants, a group which formed the core of his campaign’s famous turnout operation in 2004. On the other side of the conservative coin, Bush merits a 70 percent approval rating from small government conservatives.”
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/behind-the-numbers/2009/01/bush_approval_a_last_look.html
Republicans are tribal, to the point of idiocy and beyond.
Smarg, FOX News, February 11: Obama over Romney by 7, Huckabee by 8, Palin by 21, Gingrich by 20.
Do try and keep up.
I’ll start paying attention to polls – anyone’s polls – come May or June 2012. Until then its just political onanism.
Although I typically do not engage with trolls like Smargy, I have to admit that I am awfully tempted sometimes because he makes it so easy. It seems like shooting fish in barrel. I wonder if he walks around with a permanent “Kick Me” sign?
“I wonder if he walks around with a permanent “Kick Me” sign?”
Probably not. He’d have to be able to walk upright for that to work.
^^^”Look Ma, we got an infestation of liberal roaches in hyar!”
I thought you still lived with your mother, you have the attitude of a 15 year old.
Smarg – as witty as he is well-informed.
I wouldn’t place too much credence in these early polls. Obama rated at pretty much next to no chance 4 years ago at this time since everyone assumed it would be Hillary getting the nod.
Tempest, there is a massive difference: Obama was an unknown. In contrast, all of the GOP candidates have high name recognition and sky-high unfavorable ratings.
Watusie, I am not stating that there isn’t any difference, but Obama was the keynote speaker in 2004 and was one of the most trumpeted of the Democratic Senators coming in. He certainly was more famous than Pawlenty is now. (not that I think that matters since Pawlenty is likely to forever remain an unknown outside of our nebbish circle) In any event, I still think it is way too early for polls, remember after the first Gulf war papa Bush looked unbeatable, and he was thrashed in 1992, losing nearly 2/3rd of the vote to Clinton and Perot.