Welcome to FinHeaven Fans Forums! We're glad to have you here. Please feel free to browse the forum. We'd like to invite you to join our community; doing so will enable you to view additional forums and post with our other members.



VIP Members don't see these ads. Join VIP Now
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 18

Thread: Romney Fares Best Against Obama in Hypothetical 2012 Match-Up, Poll Shows

  1. -1
    BAMAPHIN 22's Avatar
    FinHeaven Elite

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Jul 2004
    Posts:
    19,668
    vCash:
    1000
    Loc:
    Huntsville, AL
    Thanks / No Thanks

    Romney Fares Best Against Obama in Hypothetical 2012 Match-Up, Poll Shows




    Out of a handful of potential 2012 Republican presidential candidates, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney fares the best in a hypothetical match-up against President Obama in a new national Quinnipiac poll of registered voters.


    American voters put Romney and Mr. Obama in a statistical dead heat, with Romney leading 45 percent to 44 percent.


    Mr. Obama also faces still competition from former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee in the poll, with the president leading 46 percent to 44 percent -- also a statistical dead heat.


    The president, however, takes a strong lead in a match up against former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, beating her 48 percent to 40 percent. Mr. Obama also trounces Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels, who is largely unknown to voters, 45 percent to 36 percent.
    http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_1...MainColumnArea
    Quote Quote  

  2. -2
    Starter

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Oct 2010
    Posts:
    147
    vCash:
    1000
    Thanks / No Thanks
    No way. This Country needs to move away from the Bush Neo-Cons and more toward the ideals of people like Ron Paul.
    Quote Quote  

  3. -3
    Tetragrammaton's Avatar
    Hall Of Famer

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Apr 2006
    Posts:
    9,660
    vCash:
    3022
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Romney is the only one who could win. I don't know how his Mormonism will play in the big stage, though. He has been making all of the right moves, but he is likely going to face a hostile caucus environment.
    Quote Quote  

  4. -4
    SnakeoilSeller's Avatar
    Scout Team

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Apr 2007
    Posts:
    4,500
    vCash:
    1000
    Loc:
    Galloway, NJ
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by Tetragrammaton View Post
    Romney is the only one who could win. I don't know how his Mormonism will play in the big stage, though. He has been making all of the right moves, but he is likely going to face a hostile caucus environment.
    Because Obama will be able to run on his excellent record.

    Quote Quote  

  5. -5
    Starter

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Oct 2010
    Posts:
    147
    vCash:
    1000
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by Tetragrammaton View Post
    Romney is the only one who could win. I don't know how his Mormonism will play in the big stage, though. He has been making all of the right moves, but he is likely going to face a hostile caucus environment.
    Huckabee is really close, so is Ron Paul, and the biggest mistake they could make is overlooking Sarah Palin. They said Reagan couldn't win in 80 either.
    Quote Quote  

  6. -6
    Blitz's Avatar
    The Big Zonk

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Feb 2002
    Posts:
    8,208
    vCash:
    1000
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Have you watched her show on TLC? She's a joke. She makes Tina Fey and Arnold Schwarzenegger look presidential.

    I would go so far as to say that the Republicans are the favorite to win unless they nominate Palin. Then again, who knows where the economy will be two years from now. However, I suspect an independent would win the presidency if the economy is worse or the same two years from now, and the parties decide to offer people Obama and Palin.
    Quote Quote  

  7. -7
    SnakeoilSeller's Avatar
    Scout Team

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Apr 2007
    Posts:
    4,500
    vCash:
    1000
    Loc:
    Galloway, NJ
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by Blitz View Post
    Have you watched her show on TLC? She's a joke. She makes Tina Fey and Arnold Schwarzenegger look presidential.

    I would go so far as to say that the Republicans are the favorite to win unless they nominate Palin. Then again, who knows where the economy will be two years from now. However, I suspect an independent would win the presidency if the economy is worse or the same two years from now, and the parties decide to offer people Obama and Palin.
    Did you watch it? I don't see how anyone can say that after her success with helping in the 2010 Mid terms that she is a joke. Voters did not seem to think so. They did say the same exact thing about Reagan, and I remember lots of people saying that there is no way an inexperienced Senator named Obama could never beat Hillary Clinton and the Clinton machine.
    Quote Quote  

  8. -8
    Blitz's Avatar
    The Big Zonk

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Feb 2002
    Posts:
    8,208
    vCash:
    1000
    Thanks / No Thanks
    I watched half of the first episode, and part of an episode last night. It makes her look pathetic. The entire time you can tell she is thinking to herself, "oh, all of this is helping me run for president next year!" Notice how her oldest son practically avoids the whole debacle that is "Sarah Palin the candidate for nationwide office"? Her husband is probably too ball-less to tell her what is what. Her daughters are too young and naive to know any better. But at least somebody in that family knows what kind of a farce this is...

    Was she really a net benefit to the GOP in the 2010 midterms? Even the candidate she endorsed in ALASKA, of all places, LOST (And the resources the GOP spent there would have been better spent elsewhere). I would go so far as to say that her nonsense cost the Republicans the Senate by pushing forth losing candidates in Colorado, Delaware, and (the huge one) Nevada. Trying to get those people into the Senate is like putting lipstick on a pig, and trying to convince people it is a pitbull. It also indirectly hurt the GOP candidate in Washington, who would have been the one to push them to 51 seats in the Senate. Rand Paul is the only real tea party candidate for Senate who won, and he won because he is intelligent, savvy, has powerful political support due to his father, happened to be in conservative/libertarian Kentucky, and he stood as his own man instead of relying upon the joke that is Tina Fey--err, Sarah Palin.

    If you want a preview of what Palin Vs. Obama would be, even with an unimproved economy, just go revisit the senate race in Nevada.

    If you want a re-run of 1980, assuming the economy only gets worse the next two years, nominate Gingrich or Paul. It is appropriate to compare their candidacy to Reagan circa 1980, especially compared to Palin.
    Quote Quote  

  9. -9
    SnakeoilSeller's Avatar
    Scout Team

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Apr 2007
    Posts:
    4,500
    vCash:
    1000
    Loc:
    Galloway, NJ
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by Blitz View Post
    I watched half of the first episode, and part of an episode last night. It makes her look pathetic. The entire time you can tell she is thinking to herself, "oh, all of this is helping me run for president next year!" Notice how her oldest son practically avoids the whole debacle that is "Sarah Palin the candidate for nationwide office"? Her husband is probably too ball-less to tell her what is what. Her daughters are too young and naive to know any better. But at least somebody in that family knows what kind of a farce this is...

    Was she really a net benefit to the GOP in the 2010 midterms? Even the candidate she endorsed in ALASKA, of all places, LOST (And the resources the GOP spent there would have been better spent elsewhere). I would go so far as to say that her nonsense cost the Republicans the Senate by pushing forth losing candidates in Colorado, Delaware, and (the huge one) Nevada. Trying to get those people into the Senate is like putting lipstick on a pig, and trying to convince people it is a pitbull. It also indirectly hurt the GOP candidate in Washington, who would have been the one to push them to 51 seats in the Senate. Rand Paul is the only real tea party candidate for Senate who won, and he won because he is intelligent, savvy, has powerful political support due to his father, happened to be in conservative/libertarian Kentucky, and he stood as his own man instead of relying upon the joke that is Tina Fey--err, Sarah Palin.

    If you want a preview of what Palin Vs. Obama would be, even with an unimproved economy, just go revisit the senate race in Nevada.

    If you want a re-run of 1980, assuming the economy only gets worse the next two years, nominate Gingrich or Paul. It is appropriate to compare their candidacy to Reagan circa 1980, especially compared to Palin.
    So you based your entire opinion on Palin's show by watching roughly 15 minutes. Well, I guess that is enough time to come away with an educated opinion, right? She backed candidates that won, and even the Washington Post had to admit she was a force in the mid terms. Well the huge one in Nevada, the voters picked Angle, Palin did not endorse a primary candidate. What she did was support the Republican nominee. Should she have gone against her and the entire party? So in "the big one" you want to blame Palin, just to blame Palin. And you are just horribly wrong to say that Rand Paul was the only Tea Party candidate to win. Ron Johnson, Senator elect from Wisconsin, who defeated liberal Democrat Russ Feingold, was a huge Tea PArty member, in fact he did not decide to get involved until after he attended a Tea PArty rally. Mike Lee, Utah, won in the primary, and won the seat. To say it was only Rand Paul is just plain wrong. That is the lie that the mainstream media just pushes, and many gobble it up without knowing the facts.

    If you want a preview of 1996 then Gingrich, Romney, or Huckabee is your man. If you want a record blow out win for Obama, nominate Paul.
    Quote Quote  

  10. -10
    shula_guy's Avatar
    FinHeaven VIP

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Sep 2006
    Posts:
    8,781
    vCash:
    1236
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Personaly I like gingrich, mitch danniels, jeb bush, bobby jindal and maybe christie or rubio as opposition to Obama in 2012. I like Palin but I think she is too polarizing to get elected and her nomination would energize Obamas base to get out and vote against her. I would like to see Palin take steeles job. He has done a terrible job of getting the gop's message out. She can much more effective in that regard.
    Quote Quote  

Similar Threads

  1. Most approve of Obama's Cabinet picks, poll shows
    By MDFINFAN in forum Political | War Forum
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 11-13-2012, 10:22 PM
  2. Poll: In Florida, Romney Now Leads Obama
    By BAMAPHIN 22 in forum Political | War Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 05-24-2012, 03:08 PM
  3. Poll: Romney has slight edge over Obama
    By BAMAPHIN 22 in forum Political | War Forum
    Replies: 81
    Last Post: 05-18-2012, 03:16 PM
  4. Obama edges out Romney in hypothetical matchup - poll
    By BAMAPHIN 22 in forum Political | War Forum
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 02-07-2012, 07:45 AM
  5. CNN 2012 Poll: Obama and Palin going in different directions
    By Dolphins9954 in forum Political | War Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 12-29-2010, 10:04 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •