Latest polls likely to make the GOP establishment sweat

[Dafinch]

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/latest-polls-likely-make-the-gop-establishment-sweat

GO, Boy Blunder, GO, lol! Is there really anybody who thinks that any of the top 4 could win a general election?

[h=1]Latest polls likely to make the GOP establishment sweat[/h]
10/05/15 08:00 AM—UPDATED 10/05/15 08:17 AM

facebook twitter 1 save share group 66​

By Steve Benen
In July, it was fairly common to hear the Republican establishment and much of the media see Donald Trump atop 2016 GOP polling and ask, “Sure he’s leading now, but can he sustain this advantage into August?” And then in August, they’d ask, “Sure he’s leading now, but can he sustain this advantage into September?” And then in September, they’d ask, “Sure he’s leading now, but can he sustain this advantage into October?”

It’s October. Here are the latest national results from the Pew Research Center.

1. Donald Trump: 25%
2. Ben Carson: 16%
3. Carly Fiorina: 8%
3. Marco Rubio: 8%
5. Ted Cruz: 6%
6. Jeb Bush: 4%
7. Mike Huckabee: 2%
7. Rand Paul: 2%

The remaining candidates are at 1% or below in the Pew findings. (Note, this is the first survey of the cycle from the Pew Research Center, so I didn’t include figures as to whether the candidates’ support was increasing or decreasing.)

In addition to Trump’s role as the frontrunner – a role he hasn’t relinquished since surging to the top in the early summer – pay particular attention to Jeb Bush’s surprisingly poor showing. It may be an outlier, but if the Florida Republican’s national backing has dropped to just 4% – a number, ironically, Bush has placed great significance in – it suggests his standing may be reaching the point of no return.

Indeed, though John McCain and Mitt Romney hit rough patches before securing their party’s nomination in 2008 and 2012, respectively, neither one ever came close to a 4% floor.

And while national results like these will give much of the GOP establishment heart palpitations, the news is no better at the state level.


Here, for example, are the results of the new NBC News/Wall Street Journal/Marist poll of Iowa Republicans:

1. Donald Trump: 24% (down five points from September)
2. Ben Carson: 19% (down three points)
3. Carly Fiorina: 8% (up three points)
4. Jeb Bush: 7% (up one point)
5. Ted Cruz: 6% (up two points)
5. Marco Rubio: 6% (up two points)
5. Bobby Jindal: 6% (up two points)
8. Mike Huckabee: 5% (up two points)
9. Rand Paul: 4% (down one point)
9. Chris Christie: 4% (up two points)
11. John Kasich: 3% (up one point)

Jindal, oddly enough, is now faring better in Iowa than he is in his home state of Louisiana – though I suppose that’s not saying much.

Meanwhile, NBC News/Wall Street Journal/Marist also polled New Hampshire Republicans:

1. Donald Trump: 21% (down seven points from September)
2. Carly Fiorina: 16% (up 10 points)
3. Jeb Bush: 11% (up three points)
4. Marco Rubio: 10% (up seven points)
4. Ben Carson: 10% (down one point)
6. Chris Christie: 7% (up two points)
7. Ted Cruz: 6% (up one point)
7. John Kasich: 6% (down six points)
9. Rand Paul: 5% (no change)

Kasich, in particular, has focused heavily on the Granite State, though if this poll is accurate, his support has faltered of late, slipping from double-digit backing a month ago.

As for the top slot, it appears Trump has gone from dominating the race for the GOP nomination to merely leading it. No candidate is ever pleased when his or her support slips, but the New York developer and his followers can’t complain too much about results like these.

The Republican establishment figures who’ve been anxiously awaiting Trump’s seemingly inevitable collapse will have to wait a bit longer.

 

[SheriffJoe]

Is that a RED bar in your profile?

I think duhhhhhhfinch is the only poster I've ever seen with a RED bar.

Wow! That really says something, even in here.

Loser!@#0

 

[MantisToboggan]

Why should they be sweating? His current support is lower now than it was in late August/early September. I don't think anyone expected him to go from 30 to 0 overnight.

As far as your question, Finchy, yes, Rubio could win a general election. I'd guess that even the lefties down here would agree with me on that.

 

[Willie99]

nope, the GOP establishment might not like libtarded laws, but we don't worry much about them

you see, it's not like we need them to feed our family or put our kids in a heated home

nope, only the libtard base needs to worry about government, they're too lazy to do anything else

 

[SheriffJoe]

nope, the GOP establishment might not like libtarded laws, but we don't worry much about them

you see, it's not like we need them to feed our family or put our kids in a heated home

nope, only the libtard base needs to worry about government, they're too lazy to do anything else

 

[Dafinch]

Why should they be sweating? His current support is lower now than it was in late August/early September. I don't think anyone expected him to go from 30 to 0 overnight.

As far as your question, Finchy, yes, Rubio could win a general election. I'd guess that even the lefties down here would agree with me on that.

Oh, I forgot, you were sick the day they taught politics in school. See if you can follow along: The GOP establishment doesn't like Trump. They've questioned, as the article mentions, if he would "sustain his advantage(read: lead)" for three, count 'em, three different months now, and gotten an answer they didn't like every single time. If you're too dumb to see why they are concerned, oh, well, and, not exactly a shock.

As for your final sentence, your "guess" would be wrong, as usual. That idiot's stance on abortion alone would be enough to deny him the election, not to mention the fact that he has scandals which will receive a helluva lot more attention in a general election than they are now. Even if he DIDN'T have those two huge negatives, the likelihood for a guy cruising along at 8% among Republican voters, even 13 months out, winning an election that includes Democrat voters, well, that's why you are the Praying Mantis, with a brain to match.

 

[MantisToboggan]

Oh, I forgot, you were sick the day they taught politics in school. See if you can follow along: The GOP establishment doesn't like Trump. They've questioned, as the article mentions, if he would "sustain his advantage(read: lead)" for three, count 'em, three different months now, and gotten an answer they didn't like every single time. If you're too dumb to see why they are concerned, oh, well, and, not exactly a shock.

Obviously, you were too stupid to correctly interpret my first post so I'll try again. Your article is bull shit. They aren't sweating Trump. The fact that he is still in the lead doesn't mean anyone is concerned. He is falling in the polls and will continue to fall. As I said before he wasn't going from 30 to 0 overnight. Iowa is still 4 months away. No one gives a shit who is in the lead on October 5, 2015. I'm getting tired of dealing with your dumb ass.

 

[Dafinch]

Obviously, you were too stupid to correctly interpret my first post so I'll try again. Your article is bull shit. They aren't sweating Trump. The fact that he is still in the lead doesn't mean anyone is concerned. He is falling in the polls and will continue to fall. As I said before he wasn't going from 30 to 0 overnight. Iowa is still 4 months away. No one gives a shit who is in the lead on October 5, 2015. I'm getting tired of dealing with your dumb ass.

Why is it "full of shit?" Because a fucking moron like YOU says so??!?! If they were so unconcerned, Jagoff, why have they specifically named 3 different months when they speculated that his advantage would disappear? To think that YOU can speak for "anyone(being concerned)" is as arrogant as it it stupid. And, nobody cares who is in the lead on 10/5/15? Then, why do they take so many polls, asshole? And, if you're so "tired" of dealing with me, stay the fuck out of threads that I start, take your brain dead opinion, and cram up your ass, cocksucker...Slapping-silly90))Loser!@#0kth)(&^:madasshol:trx-smly0:kissingbb:fckmad::Countdown

 

[PatsFan1283]

Is that a RED bar in your profile?

I think duhhhhhhfinch is the only poster I've ever seen with a RED bar.

Wow! That really says something, even in here.

Loser!@#0

A few people in the main forum have the 1 red but usually you only get it by suggesting someone deserved to die in a horrible tragic accident or something of that nature. You gotta earn that shit.

 

[The Guesser]

Why should they be sweating? His current support is lower now than it was in late August/early September. I don't think anyone expected him to go from 30 to 0 overnight.

As far as your question, Finchy, yes, Rubio could win a general election. I'd guess that even the lefties down here would agree with me on that.

How can the GOP put Marco out there as the candidate, when everything about him is exactly what they've complained about with Obama for 8 years? No experience, too young, career Politician, lied about his backstory, alluring speaker without substance. Could he win a general? If everything broke right. But they have better options with less weaknesses.

 

[PatsFan1283]

It's too early in the process for anyone to sweat but obviously Walker's comments when he dropped out were pretty telling. He basically said the GOP needed to consolidate to stop The Trumpening.

 

[SheriffJoe]

How can the GOP put Marco out there as the candidate, when everything about him is exactly what they've complained about with Obama for 8 years? No experience, too young, career Politician, lied about his backstory, alluring speaker without substance. Could he win a general? If everything broke right. But they have better options with less weaknesses.

Gag me with a spoon - this may be the first post we've ever agreed on. hno:

Not saying I'd self ban but I doubt I'd be around here to defend Rubio.

His tax plan is horrendous social engineering from the right and his foreign policy would make the Bush-Cheney doctrine look like isolationism. President Rubio = Big Government as far as the eye can see.

People are seduced by Rubio's slick tongue and rave about his intellect but how smart can the guy be when he was seduced by the Gang of Eight almost immediately after he arrived in Washington?

 

[PatsFan1283]

I thought the Bush/Cheney doctrine played well with the GOP? Being an FP hawk is a negative now? Isn't being too far the other way what is killing Paul?

Do voters even think these things through?

I always admire your objectivity Joe, but fortunately politics has become so polarized that the rest will just fall in line.

Got a hilarious Rubio fundraising email a few days ago. I think I deleted it, if I can find it I'll post it.

 

[PatsFan1283]

the subject title is "this can't be right" (not making that up)

Hey -

I was just reviewing some reports ahead of tomorrow's deadline and I saw that you hadn't contributed to Marco's campaign yet. Is this correct?

If it is, can you take a minute and donate $7 right now so we can add your name to our report? Click here to give.

Thanks!

Jessica Ennis
Political Director
Marco Rubio for President



Cmon man, get ahead of fuckin Ben Carson first and then maybe I'll donate.

 

[SheriffJoe]

I thought the Bush/Cheney doctrine played well with the GOP? Being an FP hawk is a negative now? Isn't being too far the other way what is killing Paul?

Do voters even think these things through?

I always admire your objectivity Joe, but fortunately politics has become so polarized that the rest will just fall in line.

Got a hilarious Rubio fundraising email a few days ago. I think I deleted it, if I can find it I'll post it.

Being a hawk is fine, it's the nation building that turns people off. When Democrats portrayed Republicans as Big Government socialists abroad, they were - gulp! - right and one of the reasons the GOP lost big.

Conservatives want Reagan pragmatism, not McCain-Graham adventurism putting out fires in every corner of the globe.

Common sense conservatism abroad, brought to you by none other than...Gov. Sarah Palin:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

First, we should only commit our forces when clear and vital American interests are at stake. Period.

Second, if we have to fight, we fight to win. To do that, we use overwhelming force. We only send our troops into war with the objective to defeat the enemy as quickly as possible. We do not stretch out our military with open-ended and ill-defined missions. Nation building is a nice idea in theory, but it is not the main purpose of our armed forces. We use our military to win wars.

And third, we must have clearly defined goals and objectives before sending troops into harm’s way. If you can’t explain the mission to the American people clearly and concisely, then our sons and daughters should not be sent into battle. Period.

Fourth, American soldiers must never be put under foreign command. We will fight side by side with our allies, but American soldiers must remain under the care and the command of American officers.

Fifth, sending in our armed forces should be the last resort. We don’t go looking for dragons to slay. However, we will encourage the forces of freedom around the world who are sincerely fighting for the empowerment of the individual. When it makes sense, when it’s appropriate, we will provide them with material support to help them win their own freedom.

We are not indifferent to the cause of human rights or the desire for freedom. We are always on the side of both. But we can’t fight every war.

We can’t undo every injustice around the world.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Timeless words of wisdom.

Anyway, ideology aside, when have young presidents ever panned out? They're way too naive.

America needs wisdom, (real world) experience, calm leadership and statesmanship, not another "I can change the world" cocky neophyte.

Can you picture Rubio sitting across the table from Putin? Yikes.

 

[SheriffJoe]

It's too early in the process for anyone to sweat but obviously Walker's comments when he dropped out were pretty telling. He basically said the GOP needed to consolidate to stop The Trumpening.

Then show me the candidate with a better tax and immigration plan than Trump.

For all the GOPe's caterwauling about how much of a clown show Trump is, he's the only one who has put forward any detailed realistic concrete policies. Notice how little criticism they've received from the right and left - they make too much sense. Instead, his critics prefer to focus on superficialities like his hair, mannerism and "You're fired!" TV persona.

The truth is, for all his showmanship (and that is all it is), Trump has exhibited the most restraint during this Obama-manufactured Putin crisis.

Carly Fiorina recently said we "have to be prepared to use force in Syria!" (Say what???? Send in the military to back up President "Selfie's" moronic "red lines"???)....you've got to be fucking kidding me!! face)(*^%)

 

[vitterd]

the subject title is "this can't be right" (not making that up)

Hey -

I was just reviewing some reports ahead of tomorrow's deadline and I saw that you hadn't contributed to Marco's campaign yet. Is this correct?

If it is, can you take a minute and donate $7 right now so we can add your name to our report? Click here to give.

Thanks!

Jessica Ennis
Political Director
Marco Rubio for President



Cmon man, get ahead of fuckin Ben Carson first and then maybe I'll donate.

I cannot believe a professional campaign would send out an email like that

 

[PatsFan1283]

JFK

If you want to bring age into it, I'm going to go the other way completely. Why do we want the same old tired leadership that we have had for 3 decades? We haven't gotten big things done for a long time now in this country, we do need a new leader for a new era. I could elaborate more on this but I'll just say we've greatly decelerated and/or outright failed in many areas. Even if Rubio isn't the answer, I'll pass on another 70 year old blueblood that was born with a silver spoon in his mouth.

It IS time to turn the page. Just because Obama was the wrong change doesn't mean it isn't needed. A LOT of change is needed. Obama's age isn't the issue, his ideas/policies are the issue.

I'd say "hey Sarah, how do you reconcile those opinions of yours with the fact you were pro-Iraq war" but you and I both know that type of question probably wouldn't bring the most intelligent response.

And lastly, I'm guessing there are a lot of posts on the internet of you supporting GW Bush and his big gov't liberal utopia so I'm sure you can come around on whatever negatives you feel Rubio has, right?

 

[PatsFan1283]

Nation building, no child left behind, class D medicare bill, letting Greenspan/Bernanke run wild....

Rubio would be 10 times more conservative than Bush by default. Really can't do any worse.

 

[neverbend]

Nation building, no child left behind, class D medicare bill, letting Greenspan/Bernanke run wild....

Rubio would be 10 times more conservative than Bush by default. Really can't do any worse.

The stench of Rubio's 'Gang of Eight' pathway to citizenship for illegals will not be forgotten even though
like a typical politician he caved quickly when the plan wasn;t as well received as he had hoped for.
Just take a look at Rubio's partners in crime who helped create his ill conceived plan.
Senators Dick Durbin, D-Ill, Micheal Bennet, D-Co, John McCain R-Ar, Lindsey Graham R-SC,
Chuck Shumer, D-NY, Bob Menendez, D-NJ, Jeff Flake R-Ar, & Rubio

If that isn't a team of likeminded individuals what is? Rubio may have to support of the low info
group obviously unaware of this infraction and impressed by what some see as command of issues,
not me. Some foreign policy expert, on almost every issue he sides with McCain & Graham, not good.