Newtmentum -- Gingrich Surges In First Post-Debate Poll
Posted by Ashish on 01.18.2012
Is Gingrich coming back to life?
The first poll following Monday night's debate is out -- Rasmussen has Newt Gingrich surging to 27%, just 3% behind Mitt Romney nationally. Rick Santorum follows with 15%, and Ron Paul is at 13%.
I discussed in my debate review how Gingrich would likely get a bounce out of it since he went back to what made him so popular among Republican primary voters in early December -- attacking moderators and making red meat conservative statements without any hesitation or timidness -- but few probably expected a bounce this big. Of course, it's one poll. We'll be getting more new polls later today, I'll update then.
As usual, Ron Paul is fourth. Fourth. He only beats perpetually befuddled and confused Perry. You Paulies are really embarassing yourselves.
Posted By: Guest#8899 (Guest) on January 18, 2012 at 12:24 PM
Rasmussen tends to be wildly in love with neoconservatives. No one cares about Newt enough to take the effort to get up and vote for him.
Posted By: Michael (Guest) on January 18, 2012 at 12:38 PM
Newt gets this kind of bounce because he's really the candidate that Republicans _want_. Unfortunately, too many people are swayed by the commentary they see on late-night TV, biased news anchors, and other outlets that absolutely *HATE* Gingrich and so he is more of a yo-yo than any other candidate.
Posted By: King Durin (Guest) on January 18, 2012 at 01:09 PM
Then people remember the other stupid shit Newt said and go "no fucking way am I voting for him."
Posted By: Scott B (Guest) on January 18, 2012 at 01:12 PM
Cue the complaints about ashish's librul bias and how this site is a complete joke in 5...4...3...2...1....
Seriously, though, what killed newt in Iowa and nh was the lack of debates after the negative ads hit. As a debater he is head and shoulders above the field, and always does better in polling right after a debate. His message resonates with republicans and he delivers it with ease and conviction. All things Romney lacks.
Paulies-his message has hit it's ceiling in the repub primary. Deal with it. He has done what he set out to do- make his movement a force in the party that his son can pick up and run with. And everyone knows it. THAT is why he's ignored by the media as a contender, not because of bias, but because the party as a whole does not align with his views.
That said, as a life long dem, Paul is the one who would worry me most in a general election, as his views could pick off enough independents and libertarian dems (yeah that ideology does have a lot of followers in both parties, depending on whether their focus is more on civil liberties or economic ones) to actually win.
Gingrich has so much baggage and was thought of as a joke for so long, I don't know how well he crosses over. Plus his running conflict with historical facts makes him a poor historian.
Santorum has no chance. Google it.
Romney is such an inauthentic stuffed shirt. His healthcare positions take Obamacareare off the table, his flip flops negate obama's broken promises and vulture capitalism plays right into the 99% vs 1% beef. Seriously, Obama could be so lucky that this guy is the nominee.
Rick Perry, we hardly knew ye. But once repubs got a chance to, they laughed you out the door.
I wish Huntsman could have gained some traction, he seemed like he could have made an interesting general campaign. He'll be back in 2016, hopefully this time with a competent campaign.
Posted By: Guest#3076 (Guest) on January 18, 2012 at 02:06 PM
As usual, Ron Paul is fourth. Fourth. He only beats perpetually befuddled and confused Perry. You Paulies are really embarassing yourselves.
Posted By: Guest#8899 (Guest) on January 18, 2012 at 12:24 PM
Remember the latest Ron Paul talking points from the previous thread. Now the excuse is "he doesn't need the nomination, he's just in it to spread awareness."
Posted By: Scott B (Guest) on January 18, 2012 at 02:34 PM
"As usual, Ron Paul is fourth. Fourth. He only beats perpetually befuddled and confused Perry. You Paulies are really embarassing yourselves.
Posted By: Guest#8899 (Guest) on January 18, 2012 at 12:24 PM
"
Based on Iowa and New Hampshire, I think you are confusing Ron Paul with Newt Gingrich, the failure.
Posted By: Michael (Guest) on January 18, 2012 at 03:08 PM
I like commenting 5 times a article. I love telling people that republicans are stupid while ignoring the mess created by the Dems. I am a 411 2012 version of Gary ML.
Posted By: Scott B (Guest) on January 18, 2012 at 03:54 PM
What? All I said was that black people need to learn the value of paychecks, not food stamps. I'm trying to HELP!
Posted By: Newt Gingrich (Guest) on January 18, 2012 at 07:29 PM
"Paulies-his message has hit it's ceiling in the repub primary. Deal with it. He has done what he set out to do- make his movement a force in the party that his son can pick up and run with. And everyone knows it. THAT is why he's ignored by the media as a contender, not because of bias, but because the party as a whole does not align with his views."
Stalin would've loved you.
Posted By: Michael (Guest) on January 18, 2012 at 08:17 PM
I like commenting 5 times a article. I love telling people that republicans are stupid while ignoring the mess created by the Dems. I am a 411 2012 version of Gary ML.
Posted By: Scott B (Guest) on January 18, 2012 at 03:54 PM
Which mess would that be? The one they inherited from Bush?
Posted By: Guest#5872 (Guest) on January 18, 2012 at 08:27 PM
Which mess would that be? The one they inherited from Bush?
Posted By: Guest#5872 (Guest) on January 18, 2012 at 08:27 PM
You're a total partisan shill. Both parties are to blame for this mess at this point. The question is which party is the right one to get us out of it. Unfortunately, I believe the answer is neither.
Posted By: RP (Guest) on January 19, 2012 at 01:03 AM
Awwww, you're back to imitating me again! And of course the mods ignore it. Ah well, you only show your ignorance when you do this. You demonstrate that, as usual, Paul-ites live in their magical unicorn fairy tale land, and are incapable of trying to factually rebut anything I say about him or his fellow Libertarians.
Oh, and for the record... I don't ignore the Dems. I pretty much hate Obama. Sad thing is, right now he's the least of the evils.
Posted By: Scott B (Guest) on January 19, 2012 at 01:46 AM
I like commenting 5 times a article. I love telling people that republicans are stupid while ignoring the mess created by the Dems. I am a 411 2012 version of Gary ML.
Posted By: Scott B (Guest) on January 18, 2012 at 03:54 PM
Which mess would that be? The one they inherited from Bush?
Posted By: Guest#5872 (Guest) on January 18, 2012 at 08:27 PM
Obama takes his marching orders from the same corporations Bush did. That's called facism, when the corporations take over. That's what has happend.
Posted By: Guest#7172 (Guest) on January 19, 2012 at 06:03 AM
"ignoring the mess created by the Dems"
This is the saddest (and stupidest)thing I've ever read/heard/seen
Posted By: Guest#7744 (Guest) on January 19, 2012 at 08:11 AM
Which mess would that be? The one they inherited from Bush?
Posted By: Guest#5872 (Guest) on January 18, 2012 at 08:27 PM
You're a total partisan shill. Both parties are to blame for this mess at this point. The question is which party is the right one to get us out of it. Unfortunately, I believe the answer is neither.
Posted By: RP (Guest) on January 19, 2012 at 01:03 AM
U mad bro?
Posted By: Guest#1931 (Guest) on January 19, 2012 at 11:07 AM
"Paulies-his message has hit it's ceiling in the repub primary. Deal with it. He has done what he set out to do- make his movement a force in the party that his son can pick up and run with. And everyone knows it. THAT is why he's ignored by the media as a contender, not because of bias, but because the party as a whole does not align with his views."
Stalin would've loved you.
Posted By: Michael (Guest) on January 18, 2012 at 08:17 PM
Actually, considering how easily you fell for paul's cult of personality, he'd probably like you better. That's the best part, when stating the obvious-namely Ron Paul is incapable of winning the repub primary because republicans don't buy his schtick-I'm labeled a communist, or Trotskyist or whatever the Stalin comment was supposed to imply.
Seriously, paulies, get your heads out of your asses. He has a better chance to win if he runs as the libertarian party candidate, because this group is never, ever going to nominate him. Fact.
Another fun fact: while covertly racist candidates usually do relatively well, overtly racist candidates tend to do poorly, yet another reason Paul won't win.
Posted By: Guest#6313 (Guest) on January 19, 2012 at 11:52 AM
STAY CURRENT