Home » North America, Politics, Statistics / Polls » Obama in Close Race Against Romney, Perry, Bachmann, Paul


Obama in Close Race Against Romney, Perry, Bachmann, Paul

 
 
 
 
 
submit to reddit

President Barack Obama is closely matched against each of four possible Republican opponents when registered voters are asked whom they would support if the 2012 presidential election were held today. Mitt Romney leads Obama by two percentage points, 48% to 46%, Rick Perry and Obama are tied at 47%, and Obama edges out Ron Paul and Michele Bachmann by two and four points, respectively.

These prospective election ballots — measured Aug. 17-18, well over a year before the Nov. 6, 2012, election — indicate that the race for president at this point is generally competitive, with voters fairly evenly divided in their preference for giving Obama a second term or electing a Republican candidate. Even though the four Republican candidates tested have varying degrees of name recognition, they all fare roughly the same.

Gallup’s generic presidential ballot — measured six times this year — shows a close race between Obama and a generic “Republican presidential candidate,” although there have been survey-to-survey variations on this measure, with the Republican candidate leading in June and July.

President Obama’s job approval rating is hovering around the 40% mark. This is below the rating that any of the six incumbent presidents re-elected since Eisenhower has had at the time of the presidential election. However, in August of the year before they were re-elected, Ronald Reagan (43%) and Bill Clinton (46%) were both below 50%. Obama’s position of rough parity against leading GOP candidates shows that more Americans at the moment say they would vote for Obama than approve of the job he is doing — perhaps a reflection of the continuing lack of a strong front-runner on the Republican side.

With the first official votes for the Republican nomination more than five months away, and with the very real possibility that GOP candidates such as Sarah Palin, Rudy Giuliani, and George Pataki may jump into the race, much could still change as the election process unfolds. A look at presidential election trial heats conducted in the late summer of the year before previous elections reveals that such change is quite common:

* In August 1999, Texas Gov. George W. Bush led Vice President Al Gore by 55% to 41% in a Gallup trial heat poll. That race ended up in a virtual dead heat, with Gore ultimately winning slightly more of the national popular vote than Bush.
* In August 1995, Kansas Sen. Bob Dole was slightly ahead of President Bill Clinton in a Gallup poll, 48% to 46%. On Election Day 1996, Clinton beat Dole by eight points.
* In August 1983, President Ronald Reagan was ahead of Democrat Walter Mondale by only one point, 44% to 43%. Reagan went on to beat Mondale in a 59% to 41% landslide in the November 1984 election.
* In August 1979, incumbent President Jimmy Carter was tied with former California Gov. Reagan — each getting 45% of the vote. Reagan ultimately defeated Carter by 10 points.

Voters Favor Their Party, but Republicans Lend Less Support to Bachmann, Paul

Democratic and Republican registered voters display strong allegiance for their party’s candidate across these election match-ups. Democrats are the most consistent, voting for Obama to about the same degree regardless of who the GOP candidate is. Republicans exhibit a little more variation, giving their strongest support to Perry (92% would vote for him) and Romney (91%), weaker support to Bachmann (86%), and the weakest support to Paul (82%). Independents tilt at least slightly toward voting for Romney, Perry, and Paul against Obama, while tilting slightly toward Obama when he is pitted against Bachmann.

Bottom Line

President Obama is at the moment in a rough parity position when registered voters are asked whether they would vote for him in election matchups against four potential Republican candidates. Romney fares slightly better than the other GOP candidates, and Bachmann slightly worse, but these are not large differences. Gallup research shows that these types of election measures at this stage in the campaign are not highly stable, and one can expect changes in the relative positioning of Obama and various GOP candidates in the months ahead.

Source

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  



RELATED ARTICLES

Did you like this information? Then please consider making a donation or subscribing to our Newsletter.

8 Responses to " Obama in Close Race Against Romney, Perry, Bachmann, Paul "

  1. sky says:

    Nonsense.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  2. Shylock says:

    I can’t lose.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  3. welders says:

    Well I think he will be booted out because he seems to have been inefective. Shame, I thought he would get stuff done in the beginning “Yes we can”….No you didn’t :-D

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  4. Real News says:

    Paul said he admired Reagan policies, but he never did. Perry just proved Paul as a liar.

    Perry’s campaign revealed a letter Ron Pau wrote in 1987 that stated Reagan as a reason why he left the Republican Party.

    http://www.rickperry.org/content/uploads/2011/09/PaulLetter.jpg

    The full letter: :roll:

    “As a lifelong Republican, it saddens me to have to write this letter. My parents believed in the Republican Party and its free enterprise philosophy, and that’s the way I was brought up. At age 21, in 1956, I cast my first vote for Ike and the entire Republican slate.

    Because of frustration with the direction in which the country was going, I became a political activist and ran for the U.S. Congress in 1974. Even with Watergate, my loyalty, optimism, and hope for the future were tied to the Republican Party and its message of free enterprise, limited government, and balanced budgets.

    Eventually I was elected to the U.S. Congress four times as a Republican. This permitted me a first-hand look at the interworkings of the U.S. Congress, seeing both the benefits and partisan frustrations that guide its shaky proceedings. I found that although representative government still exists, special interest control of the legislative process clearly presents a danger to our constitutional system of government.

    In 1976 I was impressed with Ronald Reagan’s program and was one of the four members of Congress who endorsed his candidacy. In 1980, unlike other Republican office holders in Texas, I again supported our President in his efforts.

    Since 1981, however, I have gradually and steadily grown weary of the Republican Party’s efforts to reduce the size of the federal government. Since then Ronald Reagan and the Republican Party have given us skyrocketing deficits, and astoundingly a doubled national debt. How is it that the party of balanced budgets, with control of the White House and Senate, accumulated red ink greater than all previous administrations put together? Tip O’Neill, although part of the problem, cannot alone be blamed.

    Tax revenues are up 59 percent since 1980. Because of our economic growth? No. During Carter’s four years, we had growth of 37.2 percent; Reagan’s five years have given us 30.7 percent. The new revenues are due to four giant Republican tax increases since 1981.

    All Republicans rightly chastised Carter for his $38 billion deficit. But they ignore or even defend deficits of $220 billion, as government spending has grown 10.4 percent per year since Reagan took office, while the federal payroll has zoomed by a quarter of a million bureaucrats.

    Despite the Supply-Sider-Keynesian claim that “deficits don’t matter,” the debt presents a grave threat to our country. Thanks to the President and Republican Party, we have lost the chance to reduce the deficit and the spending in a non-crisis fashion. Even worse, big government has been legitimized in a way the Democrats never could have accomplished. It was tragic to listen to Ronald Reagan on the 1986 campaign trail bragging about his high spending on farm subsidies, welfare, warfare, etc., in his futile effort to hold on to control of the Senate.

    Instead of cutting some of the immeasurable waste in the Department of Defense, it has gotten worse, with the inevitable result that we are less secure today. Reagan’s foreign aid expenditures exceed Eisenhower’s, Kennedy’s, Johnson’s, Nixon’s, Ford’s, and Carter’s put together. Foreign intervention has exploded since 1980. Only an end to military welfare for foreign governments plus a curtailment of our unconstitutional commitments abroad will enable us really to defend ourselves and solve our financial problems.

    Amidst the failure of the Gramm-Rudman gimmick, we hear the President and the Republican Party call for a balanced-budget amendment and a line-item veto. This is only a smokescreen. President Reagan, as governor of California, had a line-item veto and virtually never used it. As President he has failed to exercise his constitutional responsibility to veto spending. Instead, he has encouraged it.

    Monetary policy has been disastrous as well. The five Reagan appointees to the Federal Reserve Board have advocated even faster monetary inflation than Chairman Volcker, and this is the fourth straight year of double-digit increases. The chickens have yet to come home to roost, but they will, and America will suffer from a Reaganomics that is nothing but warmed-over Keynesianism.

    Candidate Reagan in 1980 correctly opposed draft registration. Yet when he had the chance to abolish it, he reneged, as he did on his pledge to abolish the Departments of Education and Energy, or to work against abortion.

    Under the guise of attacking drug use and money laundering, the Republican Administration has systematically attacked personal and financial privacy. The effect has been to victimize innocent Americans who wish to conduct their private lives without government snooping. (Should people really be put on a suspected drug dealer list because they transfer $3,000 at one time?) Reagan’s urine testing of Americans without probable cause is a clear violation of our civil liberties, as are his proposals for extensive “lie detector” tests.

    Under Reagan, the IRS has grown bigger, richer, more powerful, and more arrogant. In the words of the founders of our country, our government has “sent hither swarms” of tax gatherers “to harass our people and eat out their substance.” His officers jailed the innocent George Hansen, with the President refusing to pardon a great American whose only crime was to defend the Constitution. Reagan’s new tax “reform” gives even more power to the IRS. Far from making taxes fairer or simpler, it deceitfully raises more revenue for the government to waste.

    Knowing this administration’s record, I wasn’t surprised by its Libyan disinformation campaign, Israeli-Iranian arms-for-hostages swap, or illegal funding of the Contras. All this has contributed to my disenchantment with the Republican Party, and helped me make up my mind.

    I want to totally disassociate myself from the policies that have given us unprecedented deficits, massive monetary inflation, indiscriminate military spending, an irrational and unconstitutional foreign policy, zooming foreign aid, the exaltation of international banking, and the attack on our personal liberties and privacy.

    After years of trying to work through the Republican Party both in and out of government, I have reluctantly concluded that my efforts must be carried on outside the Republican Party. Republicans know that the Democratic agenda is dangerous to our political and economic health. Yet, in the past six years Republicans have expanded its worst aspects and called them our own. The Republican Party has not reduced the size of government. It has become big government’s best friend.

    If Ronald Reagan couldn’t or wouldn’t balance the budget, which Republican leader on the horizon can we possibly expect to do so? There is no credibility left for the Republican Party as a force to reduce the size of government. That is the message of the Reagan years.

    I conclude that one must look to other avenues if a successful effort is ever to be achieved in reversing America’s direction.

    I therefore resign my membership in the Republican Party and enclose my membership card.” :-x

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  5. prophit says:

    The letter….Ron Paul already told us he was mad at Ronny when he went for that huge tax increase that he promised he would not put on the taxpayer. So this is not news to most of us who followed him. Paul made it clear he supported Ronnie when he did becuase of his stated policy positions and once Bush was forced down Ronnies throat and the attempted assassination of Regan by Bush’s closest friend and fellow Skull and Bones man’s son, Ronnie changed his position on tax increases and thus Ron Paul changed his position on the party. THAT IS WHAT ANY MAN OF INTEGRITY WOULD DO. I know we don’t recognize men of integrity anymore, but that means we have lost our way . Thanks for proving Ron Paul is a man of integrity unlike Mr. GARDACIL OF TEXAS FORCING MEDICAL DECISIONS ON TWELVE YEAR OLD GIRLS “BY EXECUTIVE ORDER” TO AVOID THE PEOPLES ELECTED REPS FROM HAVING A SAY IN THE ACTION. MANY OF THOSE GIRLS WERE KILLED AND OR STERILIZED FROM THAT ACT.

    What a comparison. I don’t believe anyone should have any trouble seeing which way to vote this time around based just on integrity, even though there is plenty more, this alone should ensure Ron Pauls serious consideration for that high office.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  6. prophit says:

    I saw several polls a couple of weeks ago showing only Ron Paul seriously beat Obama in a head to head contest, further, These who control these polls are neocons/neolibs, since Obama’s approval rating is only 14%, there is no way those polls are right at all. I think any republican would beat Obama since the independants have totally abandoned him according to that poll and that means a huge chuck of his support has taken a hike, not even including the disgruntled conservative democrats. What a laugh, they really, really do think we are just stupid cattle, don’t they? They said we were and this piece of propoganda/disinfo proves it.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  7. John Nibarger says:

    This is the key remark of Ron Paul’s letter, and is a question each of us need to ask in this election: “If Ronald Reagan couldn’t or wouldn’t balance the budget, which Republican leader on the horizon can we possibly expect to do so? There is no credibility left for the Republican Party as a force to reduce the size of government.”

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  8. John Nibarger says:

    Aside from anyone’s “opinion” on the Ron Paul – Reagan relationship….can anyone dispute the content of Ron Paul’s letter? And when considering his topics and details…how do they relate to us today? I’d say this provides more credibility to Ron Paul. He “supported” the Reagan campaigns of 76 and 80 on the “positions” Reagan proposed and campaigned on…but he did not support the realities and bottom line results. Think about it…Carter with $38 Billion deficit vs. Reagan $220 Billion???

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

Leave a Reply


Copyright © 2009 The European Union Times – Breaking News, Latest News. All rights reserved.