Romney most damaged nominee since at least 1996
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 09:00:19 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2012 Elections
  Romney most damaged nominee since at least 1996
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2
Author Topic: Romney most damaged nominee since at least 1996  (Read 2794 times)
Tender Branson
Mark Warner 08
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,173
Austria


Political Matrix
E: -6.06, S: -4.84

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: April 12, 2012, 12:57:37 AM »



http://www.buzzfeed.com/zekejmiller/bruising-primary-has-put-romney-in-historically-w
Logged
they don't love you like i love you
BRTD
Atlas Prophet
*****
Posts: 112,707
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.50, S: -6.67

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: April 12, 2012, 01:05:08 AM »

And the difference too. WOW.
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,770


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: April 12, 2012, 01:49:30 AM »

To be fair, it seems to me like politicians in general have lower favourables now than historically. But that still doesn't excuse Romney of course.
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,612


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: April 12, 2012, 03:01:26 AM »

To be fair, it seems to me like politicians in general have lower favourables now than historically. But that still doesn't excuse Romney of course.

Naw, it's just Romney.

Has anyone polled Bush lately? I found a CNN poll from September where he was 42-53, which is comparable to Romney's numbers.
Logged
Tender Branson
Mark Warner 08
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,173
Austria


Political Matrix
E: -6.06, S: -4.84

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: April 12, 2012, 03:32:37 AM »

To be fair, it seems to me like politicians in general have lower favourables now than historically. But that still doesn't excuse Romney of course.

Naw, it's just Romney.

Has anyone polled Bush lately? I found a CNN poll from September where he was 42-53, which is comparable to Romney's numbers.

Here is how Bush does today:

BTW: George W. Bush has a 45-50 favorable rating these days, according to the poll - among all voters.
Logged
Phony Moderate
Obamaisdabest
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,298
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: April 12, 2012, 06:53:21 AM »

Also, Hillary Clinton's favorables are about 20 points higher than they were four years ago.
Logged
Brittain33
brittain33
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,933


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: April 12, 2012, 07:22:39 AM »

I can't believe Gore and Kerry were widely considered unlikable candidates and yet they look like Glinda the Good Witch next to Mitt. Romney feels so much like a Dem nominee for President, between his awkwardness, his insincere pivoting on issues, and the media's obvious disdain for him.
Logged
ZuWo
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,873
Switzerland


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: April 12, 2012, 07:25:01 AM »

To be fair, it seems to me like politicians in general have lower favourables now than historically. But that still doesn't excuse Romney of course.

Naw, it's just Romney.

Has anyone polled Bush lately? I found a CNN poll from September where he was 42-53, which is comparable to Romney's numbers.

Here is how Bush does today:

BTW: George W. Bush has a 45-50 favorable rating these days, according to the poll - among all voters.

It appears Romney is such a weak nominee that the Republicans would be better off with George W. Bush as their candidate.
Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,611


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: April 12, 2012, 07:37:36 AM »

Yep
Logged
You kip if you want to...
change08
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,940
United Kingdom
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: April 12, 2012, 08:01:53 AM »

Worst GOP nominee since Goldwater. Think about it.

Nixon, Ford, Reagan, Bush, McCain, Bush II - None of them were in the same position of being seen as unelectable as Mitt Romney is.
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,770


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: April 12, 2012, 08:22:33 AM »

To be fair, it seems to me like politicians in general have lower favourables now than historically. But that still doesn't excuse Romney of course.

Naw, it's just Romney.

Has anyone polled Bush lately? I found a CNN poll from September where he was 42-53, which is comparable to Romney's numbers.

Here is how Bush does today:

BTW: George W. Bush has a 45-50 favorable rating these days, according to the poll - among all voters.

For the record I didn't really mean individual politicians over time - I admit my wording was a bit unclear.

I may be wrong but it is my impression that public level of trust in politicians has gone down in general over the last few decades. That's certainly true here, at least.
Logged
Brittain33
brittain33
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,933


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: April 12, 2012, 08:24:32 AM »

To be fair, it seems to me like politicians in general have lower favourables now than historically. But that still doesn't excuse Romney of course.

Naw, it's just Romney.

Has anyone polled Bush lately? I found a CNN poll from September where he was 42-53, which is comparable to Romney's numbers.

Here is how Bush does today:

BTW: George W. Bush has a 45-50 favorable rating these days, according to the poll - among all voters.

For the record I didn't really mean individual politicians over time - I admit my wording was a bit unclear.

I may be wrong but it is my impression that public level of trust in politicians has gone down in general over the last few decades. That's certainly true here, at least.

It certainly has, but look at how successful Obama was in 2008 in seeming to transcend that. It's as if the negative feelings leave an opening for national politicians to appear to be above it all.
Logged
MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!
Kalwejt
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,380


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: April 12, 2012, 08:36:57 AM »

Maybe it's a time to draft George W. Bush for President?

Screw the constitution. He's still more electable than Mitt Romney.
Logged
You kip if you want to...
change08
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,940
United Kingdom
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: April 12, 2012, 09:00:17 AM »

Maybe it's a time to draft George W. Bush for President?

Screw the constitution. He's still more electable than Mitt Romney.

The funny thing is that he actually is... You couldn't drink a beer with Mitt Romney. I mean, you literally couldn't.
Logged
morgieb
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,625
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -8.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: April 12, 2012, 09:12:48 AM »

I say he's the most damaged since 1972.
Logged
Erc
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,823
Slovenia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: April 12, 2012, 09:14:06 AM »

"America Regrets Giving Bush Surprise Third Term"
Logged
Phony Moderate
Obamaisdabest
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,298
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: April 12, 2012, 09:29:01 AM »

This election may also have some similarity to UK 1992. Obama (Major), a personally well-liked leader going up against the unpopular opposition leader Romney (Kinnock) during pretty poor economic circumstances.
Logged
Wisconsin+17
Ben Kenobi
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,127
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: April 12, 2012, 12:44:37 PM »

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

This is something the Santorum campaign has been saying since day one.

Goldwater style landslide coming right up.
Logged
You kip if you want to...
change08
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,940
United Kingdom
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: April 12, 2012, 12:48:39 PM »

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

This is something the Santorum campaign has been saying since day one.

Goldwater style landslide coming right up.

I wouldn't say a landslide of those proportions is possible, but the candidate is as bad a pick. Santorum was the better candidate.
Logged
Wisconsin+17
Ben Kenobi
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,127
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: April 12, 2012, 12:52:16 PM »

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

If he's down by 12 in Colorado, then he's going to keep Idaho, Utah, and Wyoming.

Nebraska, Kansas, South Dakota and Montana are all tossup.
Logged
tmthforu94
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,401
United States


Political Matrix
E: -0.26, S: -4.52

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: April 12, 2012, 12:55:24 PM »

Nebraska, Kansas, South Dakota and Montana are all tossup.
LMAO

This made my day. lol
Logged
Boris
boris78
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,098
United Kingdom


Political Matrix
E: -1.55, S: -4.52

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: April 12, 2012, 04:55:11 PM »

Cover of Time Magazine 4/20/92:



too lazy to look up the specific numbers, but Clinton obviously had negative unfavorables in April and was probably trailing Perot and Bush as Nirvana was on their Nevermind tour and we were all glued to our TV sets watching TMNT (soon to be butchered by Michael Bay), doing M. Bison vs. Dhalsim battles, and so on. 
Logged
King
intermoderate
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,357
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: April 12, 2012, 05:27:01 PM »
« Edited: April 12, 2012, 05:30:29 PM by King »

too lazy to look up the specific numbers, but Clinton obviously had negative unfavorables in April and was probably trailing Perot and Bush

A quick google:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

So Romney is doing one point worse than Clinton did with a fresh sex scandal.  Congrats to Mitt.

Really, I only see this number going down as Mitt gets to meet the general election voters more.  Unless I'm underestimating this man, I can't see Mitt being better than -20 on Election Day.  The dude is too sleezy.
Logged
Insula Dei
belgiansocialist
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,326
Belgium


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: April 12, 2012, 05:28:29 PM »

To be fair, it seems to me like politicians in general have lower favourables now than historically. But that still doesn't excuse Romney of course.

Naw, it's just Romney.

Has anyone polled Bush lately? I found a CNN poll from September where he was 42-53, which is comparable to Romney's numbers.

Here is how Bush does today:

BTW: George W. Bush has a 45-50 favorable rating these days, according to the poll - among all voters.

For the record I didn't really mean individual politicians over time - I admit my wording was a bit unclear.

I may be wrong but it is my impression that public level of trust in politicians has gone down in general over the last few decades. That's certainly true here, at least.

Romney is being compared mainly to presidential nominees from the last decade and a half or so in this thread, though, so his awful popularity rates within that context  can't be blamed on any sort of political conjuncture.
Logged
Middle-aged Europe
Old Europe
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,178
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: April 12, 2012, 05:31:57 PM »


Bob Dole had at least a chance. Mitt Romney doesn't. Tongue
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.049 seconds with 13 queries.