For those who questioned how Ron Paul would do against Obama ... the answer, as I mentioned earlier, is quite well. Obama gets his lowest percentage against Paul. Paul is the only non-liberal within the margin of error. Based on these numbers Gingrich and Santorum need to call it quits.


Obama 42% - Obama Romney 43% (Isn't this really Obama vs Obama?)
Obama 41% - Paul 37% --- Obama +4 (Within margin of error)
Obama 44% - Perry 39% --- Obama +5
Obama 46% - Bachmann 39% --- Obama +7
Obama 44% - Christie 37% --- Obama +7
Obama 47% - Palin 38% --- Obama +9
Obama 44% - Pawlenty 32% --- Obama +12
Obama 45% - Santorum 31% --- Obama +14
Obama 44% - Huntsman 28% --- Obama +16
Obama 48% - Gingrich 30% --- Obama +18
Obama 49% - Cain 28% --- Obama +21

I don't know who took these polls, or when, but it is really remarkable if Obama cannot break 50% against candidates as "controversial" (as defined by the MSM) as Newt Gingrich, or as "inexperienced" (as defined by the media) as Herman Cain.

(07-24-2011 04:55 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  I don't know who took these polls, or when, but it is really remarkable if Obama cannot break 50% against candidates as "controversial" (as defined by the MSM) as Newt Gingrich, or as "inexperienced" (as defined by the media) as Herman Cain.

I noticed he left off who's poll this was. Probably Rasmusson(sp?). I think those numbers are WAY off. Palin 38% vs Obama? No way in hell is that even close to a legit number.

I'm not sure if Obama can break 50%. But he could win without the popular vote. He already has the West Coast and North East locked up, that's about 150 electoral votes, another 60 in states he won big in 2008 so he only needs to win FL and three decent sized states to lock it up.

California needs a major earthquake right before election day - no power, tidal wave damage, no money to fix anything, illegals clog border crossing points trying to get home, 49ers postpone game and nobody notices....

(07-24-2011 05:00 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(07-24-2011 04:55 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  I don't know who took these polls, or when, but it is really remarkable if Obama cannot break 50% against candidates as "controversial" (as defined by the MSM) as Newt Gingrich, or as "inexperienced" (as defined by the media) as Herman Cain.

I noticed he left off who's poll this was. Probably Rasmusson(sp?). I think those numbers are WAY off. Palin 38% vs Obama? No way in hell is that even close to a legit number.

That's kind of like a poll saying that 38% of people want to be infected with AIDS and thinking there's no way way that could be right, but then you realize the only other choice is cancer.

(07-24-2011 05:21 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  California needs a major earthquake right before election day - no power, tidal wave damage, no money to fix anything, illegals clog border crossing points trying to get home, 49ers postpone game and nobody notices....

Noooooo! Don't give Barry a crisis, he may just suspend elections and declare himself POTUS for 4 more years.

(07-24-2011 05:01 PM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  ...he only needs to win FL and three decent sized states to lock it up.

FL is already in doubt for him, and once Rubio is named the VP candidate it'll be out of his reach.

(07-24-2011 04:55 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  I don't know who took these polls, or when, but it is really remarkable if Obama cannot break 50% against candidates as "controversial" (as defined by the MSM) as Newt Gingrich, or as "inexperienced" (as defined by the media) as Herman Cain.

Rasmussen

(07-24-2011 05:01 PM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  I'm not sure if Obama can break 50%. But he could win without the popular vote. He already has the West Coast and North East locked up, that's about 150 electoral votes, another 60 in states he won big in 2008 so he only needs to win FL and three decent sized states to lock it up.

The election will go back to its old lines this time around.

He will not win Indiana and NC again. They're gone.

His poll numbers in PA, Colorado, Ohio and Michigan are terrible.

As Ohio goes, so goes the election.

(07-24-2011 08:31 PM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  His poll numbers in PA, Colorado, Ohio and Michigan are terrible.

Yep.

Quote:As Ohio goes, so goes the election.

That is probably true, but not necessarily. If Obama wins Only the states that supported him by a greater margin than the margin he won Ohio by in 2008, he would still have 272 Electoral Votes, and he only needs 270. That includes New Hamphire, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Iowa, Colorado, and Nevada, among others. Barring some sort of weird political miracle, Obama would have to sweep all of those states to win, if he loses Ohio. Not impossible, but not likely in my opinion, either.

Even with all that, I am inclined to agree with Ninerfan about Ohio. If there was one single state that I had to put money on to be in the winning candidate's column, Ohio would be it.

(07-24-2011 08:30 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(07-24-2011 04:55 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  I don't know who took these polls, or when, but it is really remarkable if Obama cannot break 50% against candidates as "controversial" (as defined by the MSM) as Newt Gingrich, or as "inexperienced" (as defined by the media) as Herman Cain.

Rasmussen

Why am I not surprised?

Without PA, Obabba cannot win. 10s if not 100s of $millions will be spent there.

(07-24-2011 10:01 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  Without PA, Obabba cannot win.

Yeah. If Obama loses Ohio, his re-election chances are on life-support, but they are at least alive. But if he loses Pennsylvania, it's done, kaput.
Having said that, it's worth noting that PA has voted Democrat for president 5 times in a row.