Image 01 Image 03

Rasmussen — Romney/Newt in virtual tie nationally

Rasmussen — Romney/Newt in virtual tie nationally

This is the first polling evidence of Newt’s surge which has let Romney to relaunch Operation Zany and to haul out Susan Molinari and others to attack Newt.

From Rasmussen this morning:

The race for the Republican presidential nomination is now nearly even with Mitt Romney still on top but Newt Gingrich just three points apart.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of Likely Republican Primary Voters nationwide shows Romney with 30% support and Gingrich with 27% of the vote. Former U.S. Senator Rick Santorum, who was running second two weeks ago, has now dropped to 15%.

Texas Congressman Ron Paul captures 13% support from likely primary voters, and Texas Governor Rick Perry remains in last place with four percent (4%). Another four percent (4%) like some other candidate in the race, and seven percent (7%) are undecided….

But the story in the new numbers, taken Tuesday night, is Gingrich’s jump 11 points from 16% two weeks ago. Romney’s support is essentially unchanged from 29% at that time, while Santorum is down six points from 21%.

Of course, we don’t vote “nationally,” we vote state by state.  It will be interesting to see post-debate, post-Palin sorta endorsement polling.  But with time so tight before Saturday’s election, the election may be the only accurate measure of Newt’s surge, or not.

Also, with the precipitous Santorum fall and Perry finding no movement, it’s time for them to make a hard choice — stay in and hand Romney a narrow win and the nomination, or do the right thing and throw their support behind Newt.

I know some people don’t like to hear that, but it’s the truth.

Update:  Rick Perry’s Final Act: King Maker?


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


I participated in this morning’s hatchet job from Rep. Molinari & Sen. Talent. I wrote about it here:

Rep. Molinari & Sen. Talent had the audacity to blame Bob Dole’s loss in 1996 on Newt. When the NYTimes reporter questioned that, Rep. Molinari said that turnout should’ve been better. She later backpedaled from her initial statement.

Follow the link about to read the full report of this am’s conference call.

    raven in reply to LFRGary. | January 18, 2012 at 11:47 am

    Molinari? Isn’t she the former pixie RINO darling? Now she’s an attack dog? This is all so pathetic. Gingrich was in the game in 1996, earning his Purple Hearts. Romney had recently flipped, flopped, flailed and failed against Kennedy. He couldn’t even get in the game.

    raven in reply to LFRGary. | January 18, 2012 at 11:50 am

    By the way, excellent write-up.

    Yeah, as Bob Dole would say, Bob Dole had nothing to do with Bob Dole losing. It was all Newt’s fault. Even back then, the GOP was burdening itself with the Bush legacy of liberal entitlement. With the Bush crowd that controls the GOP today, it’s “Shut and vote for our guy!”

      Jeb Bush and co. appear to be working lockstep in Florida pro-Romney. They also are behind Rubio. I suspect that’s one reason Gingrich came to Orlando yesterday. It is unclear whether the Republican Cuban vote can move the national “Hispanic” vote (very different interests), but Gingrich’s position about going easier on long-ago illegal immigrants who are upstanding citizens for decades should be far more acceptable to them then any hardliner position (huge numbers of Cubans originally came here illegally.)

Why would a Santorum or Perry withdraw cause them to support Newt? If they were all fired up for Newt they would have backed down already.

It’s just as likely that if either withdraw at this stage, they’ll support Romney just as Huntsman did, and for the same reason: you don’t want to upset the likely nominee, because payback is a (w)itch.

Generally when a candidate withdraws there is substantial pressure for ‘party unity’. That’s the whole purpose of a primary, of course, to find a suitable candidate that (most) everyone in the party can support. If it looks like Romney is that person, a withdrawing Santorum or Perry will likely support him, since they understand that their failure to do so will come back to haunt them in a future run for high office. No pol likes to make enemies in his/her own party, not when they’ll want support in 2 or 4 years in another run for an office.

If/when Santorum and Perry withdraw, they’re likely to offer their endorsement to a) Romney or b) no one. My bet is that they sure won’t endorse Newt.

    Generally speaking, a candidate’s endorsement after he’s dropped out is worth little. The voters find their way to the person they most agree with.

      stevewhitemd in reply to LFRGary. | January 18, 2012 at 12:58 pm

      I agree; most average voters will make up their own minds. But I don’t see why either Santorum or Perry would ‘automatically’ be expected to endorse Gingrich. Whatever their supporters might do, their own political futures depend a fair bit on “doing the right thing” (that is, get behind the inevitable nominee). It’s a powerful, unspoken pressure.

      That said, I have no idea what either man will actually do.

I wish Perry would make a deal with Gingrich.

Mr. Jacobson said, “Also, with the precipitous Santorum fall and Perry finding no movement, it’s time for them to make a hard choice — stay in and hand Romney a narrow win and the nomination, or do the right thing and throw their support behind Newt.

I know some people don’t like to hear that, but it’s the truth.”


Funny, I don’t recall you saying it was time for Newt to drop out when he finished near the bottom in both Iowa and NH. This continued whining for Newt is really unattractive.

    imfine in reply to Astroman. | January 18, 2012 at 11:57 am

    we like Santorum, we like Perry – thats the not the problem. We need someone who can change the terms of the debate. That’s Newt. He’s got the brains, and the bravado, and he can take a rhetorical club from Obama’s liberal guard and beat them with it.

      Astroman in reply to imfine. | January 18, 2012 at 12:17 pm

      Healthcare mandate, Freddie Mac, got outsmarted by Nancy Pelosi on man-made global warming. Thanks but no thanks.

      What we need is someone who will provide a clear contrast, a clear alternative to Obama. And that man is Rick Perry.

        imfine in reply to Astroman. | January 18, 2012 at 12:45 pm

        well if Perry would get out of dump and get to the front of the non-Romney field I would be happy to support him. The problem is that he has already fatally shot himself in the foot. get over it, his candidacy is dead and barring a miracle he’s not coming back.

        janitor in reply to Astroman. | January 18, 2012 at 12:59 pm

        I like Perry. Most folks I talk with also like Perry. A lot. But he comes in second with them (regardless of who they like as first choice), and most polls aren’t doing ranked voting. The comments I’ve heard come in along the lines of being unsure that he’s ready to go national, i.e. debate performance.

        Hope Change in reply to Astroman. | January 19, 2012 at 1:05 am

        Seriously, Astroman, with all due respect, you need to do some more research.

        You are certainly free, obviously, to support that candidate you prefer.

        but your characterizations of why you don’t support Newt are based on a complete lack of information behind your words.

        the information is out there.

        Support whatever person you like. But your criticisms of Newt are meaningless because they are not based in fact. Sorry. All due respect. But there it is.

        I chose my preferred candidate, and I;m all about trying to help others find out more and more because I think they will choose him too if the know more.

        Why not actually find out more about Newt. Your criticisms are not based in fact.

        I’ve done my homework, and I know. Why not go and do your own.


      retire05 in reply to imfine. | January 18, 2012 at 1:20 pm

      So can Chris Christie, but I wouldn’t support him for POTUS.

Professor Jacobson, I don’t seem to understand your thinking except to pander for your chosen candidate which is Newt.

We have had one non-binding caucus in Iowa, where there is a strong possiblity that Santorum was the actual winner. One primary in a northeastern state that will probably go Democrat, just as it did in the last general election. And South Carolina coming up that is just this side of the blue/red line but with only 25 delegates.

You are asking those of us who support someone else to thrown in the towel this early in the game to save Newt’s hide. I find that offensive. We have (by my count) 47 more states, the Mariannas and Guam, to yet cast a vote.

How is your advise to throw aside our chosen candidate this early in the game any different than the talking heads who are telling us that Romney is The Man?

Do you have such little faith in those of us in flyover country?

    Karen Sacandy in reply to retire05. | January 18, 2012 at 12:06 pm

    Here!! Here!!

    Astroman in reply to retire05. | January 18, 2012 at 12:14 pm

    EXACTLY. Mr. Jacobson didn’t find this exact same argument when it was made by the Santorum camp after Iowa. But now that the pendulum has all of a sudden swung to his candidate, “this is what we need to do for the good of the party.”

    Uh huh.

    If it comes down to ABO, why support the Republican that is the most like Obama (Romney)?

    If it comes down to ABR, why support the Republican that is the most like Romney (Newt)?

    The reasons why I am so opposed to Romney are the same reasons for being against Newt – pro-healthcare mandate (at least Romney only supported it for his state, whereas Newt supported it at the federal level!), buying into the leftist’s man-made global warming, oh, and Freddie Mac.

    Thanks but no thanks. If I want a not-Romney, I’ll go for someone who isn’t like Romney.

      janitor in reply to Astroman. | January 18, 2012 at 1:04 pm

      How many times does Gingrich have to say that, facing the disaster of Hillarycare, and looking for alternatives, that he and the Heritage Foundation floated this idea, but later rejected it.

      There is a big difference between having no real positions at all and pandering this and that way to whatever the candidate thinks people want to hear (Romney), and someone who is smart, creative, considers possibilities, but keeps an open mind in the face of more or better information?

        Astroman in reply to janitor. | January 18, 2012 at 2:24 pm

        That’s the thing, I want a candidate who was smart enough not to jump on things like the global warming bandwagon in the first place!

        The problem with Newt is that he is so smart, he’s convinced he is smarter than you. That is why he is do dangerous. I don’t want a president Gingrich who passes something, and then years later out of office realizes “OK, that was a bad idea.”

        Healthcare mandate, Freddie Mac, global warming – I don’t want a president prone to making those kinds of errors in judgment.

          Hope Change in reply to Astroman. | January 19, 2012 at 1:11 am

          Oh please. It is to laugh. You think these are darts of slings and arrows. They are foam. There is no there there.

          Hope Change in reply to Astroman. | January 19, 2012 at 1:19 am

          Astroman, I’ve left the response to each of those criticisms, I think, in my own comments here on past posts.

          If not, a short search of Newt’s Answers page at NEWT.ORG will answer the criticisms if you are willing to be answered. but I don’t think you want to know why your criticisms are not based in facts.

          I think you have chosen some other candidate. Fair enough. No problem. That’s what you’re supposed to do.

          But is this stealth? Instead of telling us WHY you like YOUR candidate, you’re all about telling me why others shouldn’t like theirs.

          But you don’t have your facts straight. And I, for one, know it. So how effective do you think your argument is.

          I would take you more to heart if you you tell me why you like your candidate, why you care about our country, and what you would like to see us do to improve our country.

    TryingToBeHopeful in reply to retire05. | January 18, 2012 at 12:30 pm

    @retire05 – I understand your frustration, but aren’t you being just a little disingenous? Until we change the primary/caucus system, you know very well that the majority of the states have absolutely no say in selecting the nominee (a system which I loathe). Each successive primary winnows the field down, and with the establishment elites jamming the “chosen one” crown on Romney’s head, we WILL end up with him if conservatives don’t coalesce around a not-Romney.

    I wish we had different choices, but we don’t. So we have to pick someone we think has the best chance of defeating the statists (not just the One with a D by his name).

    The Professor is just accepting the reality that the party elites WANT this contest over after Florida. 4 states. The rest of us can go pound sand. 🙁 If everyone can stay in until Super Tuesday, great; I doubt most of them will have the money to do so.

      No, I am not being disingenous at all. I can add, and subtract, and that seems to be what is lacking here. I don’t care about the first four states as their clout this year has been diminished, greatly.

      No candidate can win without having accrued at least 1,143 delegates. So far, not counting SC, we have seen 40 awarded. Now, perhaps in your mind that is a great number. But in reality, its a long way from 1,143, 1,103, to be exact. Even throwing in South Carolina, we have only then awarded 65 delegates.

      I keep telling you (who won’t listen) that this thing will not be settled even after all the votes from Super Tuesday are counted, like it was in 2008. It is a numerical impossibility to reach 1,143 by then.

      You, and the professor, are basing your opinion on just three, perhaps four, states. That is not the American way. Each voter has the right to have their say, and not be swayed by someone who thinks they are so much smarter than we are (not saying that about Professor Jacobson) but the RNC elites.

      So how about backing off, allowing the rest of the nation to at least have a say before you shove down our throats another Republican that cannot defeat Barack Hussein Obama, Jr.

        Karen Sacandy in reply to retire05. | January 18, 2012 at 12:43 pm

        I think they call all beat Obama. All of them. Everybody is sick of being unemployed and having a house worth less than they paid for it — not to mention losing the Keystone pipeline to China!

        holmes tuttle in reply to retire05. | January 18, 2012 at 2:44 pm

        you don’t seem to understand how momentum works. the other 47 states aren’t in a vacuum. if Romney wins SC, he’ll win FL. If he wins those 4 the other 46 states won’t matter. He’ll have wrapped it up. People will see him as the winner and the others as losers.

        also, SC is the state most likely to go against Romney of any in the near future. After SC is FL, NV(heavy LDS Romney won big in 08), MN, CO(also heavy LDS), ME, MI, AZ(also heavy LDS+McCain nod), WA.

        Those are the states after SC and before Super Tuesday. All very strong for Romney.

        So, he needs to be stopped in SC or it’s over/ The question then becomes what’s the best way to stop him and who is best positioned to do so.

        Objectively it appears Newt is in the best position to do so. If Perry was in the best shape I’d back him. But it’s down to crunch time. There’s one last chance. Romney’s people went hard after Perry. His campaign mgr insulted him in the press. Does Perry want to help Romney win? If he got out and backed Newt or just got out, he’d do more to hurt Romney than his entire campaign has thus far. He;d have the best way of getting back at him.

        Same for Santorum. Gingrich has been ahead of him in pretty much every SC poll, and in every FL poll. He has more money and a better organziation, such as it is. He’s better positioned to take on Romney. Santorum won’t win SC.

        As of now, Newt is the only one who has a chance, and even that is a veyr small chance. But at least it’s there.

        If you want to stop Romney, Newt is the only choice in SC. Otherwise it’s Romney. Just as it was McCain in 08.

          Henry Hawkins in reply to holmes tuttle. | January 18, 2012 at 7:25 pm

          A very nice summation of exactly how it is, and certain to be completely misunderstood by your target.

          I like Perry just fine, but his campaign is going to go down as one of the worst in recent memory. He entered at the top of the polls, enjoyed a near-perfect resume for the office he sought, sank like a stone rolled off the deck, and every single bit of it was his own fault – nobody sabotaged him, nobody ganged up on him, nothing like it. He was asked standard questions in a debate and he blew them. He tried to remediate and blew that. He was like a 1000 meter hurdler who faceplants on the first hurdle. And the second. And the third.

          I think Perry is capable of being a very good president, but he damn sure wasn’t ready. Stunning washout, and probably the worst actual national showing by one who is otherwise so strong back home, and back home is exactly where Perry needs to return.

          I predict he’ll announce he’s out by Sunday, if not Saturday night.

    If Sen. Santorum actually had money in his campaign coffers, it’d be different. He’s going to finish poorly in South Carolina, then limp into the expensive media state of Florida with no money.

    Does that sound like a man with a chance? Seriously?

      Karen Sacandy in reply to LFRGary. | January 18, 2012 at 12:44 pm

      Well, you can always fix that by giving Santorum money. I have!!!

      And done some volunteer work. If you want the best candidate to win who doesn’t have billionaire friends, you have to HELP him!

      Donate at!!!

        Why would I contribute to someone that I think is an inferior candidate?

          Karen Sacandy in reply to LFRGary. | January 18, 2012 at 12:55 pm

          That wasn’t your initial premise. Your initial premise was he had no money.

          So, what’s your true position?

          La dee dah…

          Karen Sacandy said “That wasn’t your initial premise. Your initial premise was he had no money.

          So, what’s your true position?”

          Both. Newt is the superior candidate AND Sen. Santorum doesn’t have the money to compete going forward. What incentive do I have to support Sen. Santorum?

        Count me in as one who thinks there’s a lot to like about Santorum, but I also have doubts about his appeal in a general election because of his heavy emphasis on social conservative activism. For some, it’s anti-libertarian, and for others, it’s too religion-focused. He will invigorate and rally the pro-abortion liberal factions against him. Divisive stuff would do a lot better under the radar right now, emphasizing the economy and the issues that people are more likely to agree about.

    stevewhitemd in reply to retire05. | January 18, 2012 at 1:00 pm

    One primary in a northeastern state that will probably go Democrat

    I beg to differ: NH more likely than not will go Pub this year, certainly with Romney at the top of the ticket and perhaps also with Santorum or Gingrich. It’s one of the states that (along with VA, NC and Indiana) have shifted some red since 2008.

      retire05 in reply to stevewhitemd. | January 18, 2012 at 1:19 pm

      New Hampshire has only gone Republican in ONE election in the last twenty years. One time Republican (2000), Democrat every other election since 1992.

Santorum probably won Iowa more than the former Mass. guv.

Santorum’s beat Gingrich twice.


He didn’t do the Party any favors with the Bain thing.

He needs to QUIT NOW and let us voters consolidate behind Rick Santorum!

Santorum 2012!!

    You are just as wrong as Professor Jacobson, Karen. Newt Gingrich needs to stay in the race just as long as he can, money permitting, so that ALL Americans get a choice in the matter.

    Pimping for Santorum is no more honorable than for any other candidate, in my book. I am smart enough to check the records of each candidate, and I can tell you, Santorum ain’t my guy, even if my guy fades out. And he will NEVER carry the Bible Belt, no matter how much he proselytizes.

      Karen Sacandy in reply to retire05. | January 18, 2012 at 12:46 pm

      I find use of the word “pimping” offensive. Please don’t use that word in my company.

      Thank you.

      P.S. I am familiar with Senator Santorum’s record. I have never said he is perfect. None of these candidates approaches perfection in fact, although Ron Paul does in THEORY, but he’s only managed to get one bill passed, and he’s had wanted enough earmarks to float several barges full of money. His hypocrisy doesn’t smell any better than anyone else’s. At least Santorum isn’t a hypocrite which is a pretty remarkable thing to be able to say about a politician.

      Karen Sacandy in reply to retire05. | January 18, 2012 at 12:48 pm

      I am really offended by the use of that vulgar loaded term.

      How completely inappropriate.

        retire05 in reply to Karen Sacandy. | January 18, 2012 at 1:14 pm

        I really don’t care what offends you. Start making my house payment and maybe I will alter that opinion.

          Karen Sacandy in reply to retire05. | January 18, 2012 at 1:34 pm

          Nothing quite like imitating the coarse, crass, classless, spoiled rich, who trash anything they like, and couldn’t care less about good manners.

          Who knew this was a haven for the barbarians at the gate?

          retire05 in reply to retire05. | January 18, 2012 at 3:54 pm

          Karen, spare me your victimhood. You have been pimping for Rick Santorum since you got here. Now, if you want to work for your candidate, that’s fine by me, but remember, not all of us agree with you and basically, Karen, it gets old.

          Henry Hawkins in reply to retire05. | January 18, 2012 at 6:59 pm

          Per this Karen and retire05 kerfuffle…

          Is it just me or is anyone else getting a romantic Moonlighting-style Bruce Willis/Cybil Sheperd vibe?

Karen Sacandy | January 18, 2012 at 1:52 pm

And for those that “don’t care” about their language, this is where it ends up:

    Why change the subject?

      Karen Sacandy in reply to Sanddog. | January 18, 2012 at 4:24 pm

      “Why change the subject?”

      Why should men feel it’s appropriate to use vulgar language with women they don’t know? On a public forum.

      Tell you what, I’ll just leave all you men to your locker room and your rap language.

      If someone is vulgar, it’s not changing the subject, for those too unintelligent to know. It’s calling them on being inappropriate, and I will do that.

      Just like when the fellow was going to leave his grocery cart out in the open on a hill in the parking lot. I said something – he took care of it. :^)))

      The world is WHAT YOU MAKE IT.

        retire05 in reply to Karen Sacandy. | January 18, 2012 at 5:01 pm

        Karen, obviously you have been able to procure a crystal ball that allows you to determine the gender of people who post on blogs. I am very interested in getting one of those, so could you tell me where you bought it? Amazon, perhaps?

        Also, you seem to think that you hold the authority to regulate what terms someone uses. Since you are not the owner of this website, you overstep your bounds, dear lady.

        Now, take off the hair shirt (that has “A Woman Needs A Man Like A Fish Needs A Bicycle” on it) and deal with it. The holier-than-thou attitude needs to be adjusted.

        You all men?

        Hon, you need to calm down and focus on the big picture instead of worrying about someone comparing your candidate to a prostitute.

        Actually, it should probably be considered an insult to prostitutes to have their profession slandered by comparisons to politicians.

Henry Hawkins | January 18, 2012 at 2:30 pm

Santorum and Perry are both fine candidates, but for various reasons, it isn’t happening for either of them. If Santorum’s essential tie in Iowa didn’t start a surge, it is difficult to imagine what will. Perry began on top and has dropped and dropped ever since, now at 4% nationally. Texas governor Perry trails Romney in Texas fer crissakes.

SC ends Saturday, then on to Florida. The path to victory for Santorum simply doesn’t run through the south. Short of the emergence of video of Romney and Gingrich naked in bed together, Santorum is soon finished. Perry’s run is already over, he just won’t lie down. He will withdraw Sunday, if not sooner.

Gingrich surged, dropped, and is now resurgent, within margin of error nationally. If he’s surging nationally, Gingrich is almost certainly surging in SC – it’s a southern Republican state. Romney’s renewed urgency in attacking him is an indication that the Romney team’s internals show Gingrich surging in SC. Slap on a few points for whatever it is Palin said or meant – there are many folks in SC who would jump off a cliff for Palin.

Surely Santorum and Perry see the writing on the wall. If either prefers Newt to Mitt, he needs to quit now and endorse Newt now. If either prefers Mitt to Newt, he needs to stay in until after SC.

    retire05 in reply to Henry Hawkins. | January 18, 2012 at 3:52 pm

    Henry, I would be cautious about relying on a PPP poll in Texas. And even according to their poll, Perry is basically tied with Romney.

    Now, the question are who did they poll, what areas of Texas, was it state wide or muncipal central? Was it the Dallas area, Houston area or rural areas that they polled.

    And why does any of them need to quit now? Because you say so and it helps the candidate of your choice? You want people to throw in the towel when only 40 delegates have been awarded.

    I, for one, am sick of being told by a couple of states that I no longer have a choice. What needs to be changed is the primary schedule. What makes Iowa so important, or New Hampshire or even South Carolina, for that matter? You have candidates picked by a few states that are not necessarily representative of the nation as a whole.

    It’s hard enough fighting the talking heads. Conservatives don’t need to lend their voice to the same mantra of “drop out now”. If you support a particular candidate, fine, but leave the rest of us alone who do not and allow us to have our say via our vote.

Jimmy Carter tries to give Newt the Kiss of Death.

Professor, this will should go in your race-card deck.

    punfundit in reply to Valerie. | January 18, 2012 at 3:34 pm

    Imagine that. Another leftist pig accuses a conservative of racism. Will wonders never cease?

    Henry Hawkins in reply to Valerie. | January 18, 2012 at 3:41 pm

    “Jimmy Carter tries to give Newt the Kiss of Death.”

    Valerie, you scairt the crap outta me with that. For a second there I thought Jimmy Carter had ENDORSED Newt.

      Bill Clinton too came out and criticized Newt. Those are even better endorsements than Sarah Palin + Rush Limbaugh combined!

        Henry Hawkins in reply to imfine. | January 18, 2012 at 4:54 pm

        There’s an idea afloat that the Obama team prefers Romney as the GOP candidate, feels he’s easiest to beat, and I wasn’t sure this was so until Bill Clinton attacked Romney’s closest challenger, Newt Gingrich. I’m still not 100% sure, based on 2008-related Clinton/Obama animosities.

      Hope Change in reply to Henry Hawkins. | January 19, 2012 at 1:28 am

      Henry Hawkins, So did I! ha! OMG.

TeaPartyPatriot4ever | January 18, 2012 at 11:00 pm

Newt is clearly up against the liberal Republican Party establishment apparatus, which includes Fox News, but one in which Newt can aptly and ably handle. What else is new, as Reagan had to deal with the same crony Republican Party RINO apparatus and people.
The problem is always the same thing, as the political agenda of Obama left, or the RINO right, always tries to get in the way of the Truth.
That’s what they have in common against Newt, and the Tea Party Reagan conservatives, which is why the Republican Party apparatus, can easily justify colluding with the far left, so they can ensure the reins of power and control, stay in liberal hands, of either party.

I just hope that the SC , as well as Florida, and the rest of the nation of conservative voters, come to the Reagan conservative sense, when they vote..