I always say Mittens doesn't wear well. Now we have evidence: "Romney's Fading Popularity"

[Pirate Smile]

Romney's Fading Popularity

You want to know the biggest reason Mitt Romney hasn't surged at any point in the Republican Presidential race this year? It's because the more GOP primary voters across the country have been exposed to him, the less they've liked him.

There are 13 places PPP has polled the Republican race in October or November where it also did a poll sometime between January and March. In those places Romney's net favorability has dropped by an average of 15 points over the course of the year.

On average Romney's favorability with primary voters was 54/25 in these 13 places at the beginning of the year. Now it's only 50/35. His problem is partially that his positives have gone down but more than that it's that as his name recognition has increased, most folks moving off the fence have gone into the negative column.

What's most remarkable about the decline in Romney's popularity is how uniform it's been- he's less popular now than he was at the start of the year in all 13 places where there are polls to compare. And in 11 out of the 13 places that decline in his net favorability has been at least 14 points- the only places with more modest declines are Maine and North Carolina.

This is why as Donald Trump and Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry and Herman Cain have risen and fallen Romney hasn't seen any increase in his support- GOP voters just simply aren't warming up to him at all- in fact they're going in the other direction.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2011/11/romneys-fading-popularity.html

I don't think Newt wears well either but Republicans will love his nastiness. However, nobody else will. :evilgrin:


edit to add - jefferson_dem has a thread with some numbers from polls coming out today showing not just Newt gaining but Mittens falling:

SC: Grinch 38 (+30), Mitt 15 (-1), Cain 13 (-19).

IA: Grinch 28 (+16), Paul 13 (+4), Mitt 12 (-7)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x823232

[TheWraith]

1. It comes down to this, I think.

The hard-core Republican base won't vote for Romney, because he's a Mormon and because they think he's a liberal.

The rest of the Republicans who might vote in the primary just don't like the sleazy bastard.

[Pirate Smile]

4. Mittens sounds OK in theory but the more you actually see him, the less you like him and the more

you distrust him - and I think that goes for everyone on the political spectrum.

I don't think it is because he is a Mormon. I think it is just him.

Here is a good comment on him from The Plum Line - quoting a column:

This morning, Richard Cohen takes a high profile stab at defining Romney’s character, and he comes up with a very nice capsule summary:

Mitt Romney runs for president with the eye of a venture capitalist. He sees the profit in certain positions, discards those that are no longer profitable and moves on. He was pro-choice when it did him some good, instituted a health insurance plan that he now denounces and once supported amnesty for some illegal immigrants. Richard III offered his kingdom for a horse. Romney offers his principles for some votes in Iowa.

Putting Romney’s serial flip flops in the context of his corporate past is an interesting touch, weaving together two strands of Romney’s political identity that Dems see as core vulnerabilities. The question is whether this view of Romney’s character will take hold as a broader media narrative.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/the-morning-plum/2011/11/29/gIQARQHY8N_blog.html

[Response]

7. It could also be that Romney

is a smarmy lying two-face used car salesman personality who is also a Mormon that the repugs won't vote for.

[Cosmocat]

12. I NEVER thought Nwet would be viable ...

but, he more than the rest of the clown brigade might have staying power over Romney - sort of like McCain the last go around.

He is a 100 percent, unmitigated scumbag, but he is 1000 times more politically savvy then Bachman and Cain. I THOUGHT Perry was, but he wasn't.

And, like McCain, people "know" him. That accounts for something.

I get the sense that the Rs overvalue Nwet's psuedo intelligence. TO THEM, he will "kill" BO in debates.

I would MUCH rather see him than Romney in a general.

Romney has the superficial crape that drives general elections 10 times over Nwet.

BO vs Nwet on the looks, non-scumbag scale is not even close. Not saying the election might not be close, but it brings some of the margins that would probably go to Romney back to BO.

[Pirate Smile]

13. I've been stunned by how absolutely terrible Perry has been. I love that he has

destroyed his reputation and is now a joke.

I would much rather face Newt and Romney is looking very shaky. His reactions to being challenged in the Fox News interview show how easy he gets rattled - and how clueless he is regarding how everyone views him.

The Repub race is certainly entertaining at the moment.

[karynnj]

16. Not to mentionit is very clear both Romney and Newt's teams will become nasty towards each other

If there were anybody other than them still remotely viable, it could cause give them an unexpected chance - as Newt and Romney engage in mutual destruction. There is slightly more than a month for this to happen.

If Newt does not implode, there is a good chance of winning Iowa, winning or losing narrowly in NH, then winning in South Carolina - and being the almost certain nominee.

[Pirate Smile]

17. Newt is way up in Florida. Ha!

[Cosmocat]

18. Yeah ...

I really thought Perry was going to be the guy - he had to have been REALLY bad to deflate like he did.

Romney most assuredly is thin skinned - he is all nice and comfy as a front runner, but this is it and he knows it ...

[karynnj]

15. Newt very likely will annoy people in the debates

Some of the reasons are:

1) His complete arrogance and the fact that he has been in the far right cocoon for years, makes him very prone to what math professor I had years ago called proof by intimidation. (In the math context, the professor was speaking of people who played with the equation as far as they could, then added a last line claiming it proved what the problem required proving.) Gingrich states things in a very authoritative voice and does not care if they are true or if he said the opposite last week. This works on RW radio, that's their method. As a nominee, he will get called out. More importantly, it is hard to create a more obnoxious persona-unless you went all the way and had Rush Limbaugh run.

2) Gingrich will have to show respect for President Obama in the debates. This is true no matter who the incumbent President is - and for the majority of people in the US, Obama is likable and is seen as a good man striving to fix the country. One problem Gingrich might have is that he is a ham - and clearly loves the right wing adoration. Anything showing even mild disrespect will be cheered on the far left, but will be deadly with the undecideds.

3) Gingrich is over confident in his ability to debate. In the only vaguely Lincoln/Douglass type debate he had, even right wing blogs admit that he lost - they then make the loss seem worse than it was by ignoring that Kerry might be the best debater in either party. http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2011/11/newt-gingrich-as-debater-%E2%80%93-an-extended-look.php But,the debate is not won by the quality of the logic alone. Al Gore was far better than W, but he was seen as smug with his "sighing" - which I didn't notice when viewing it. This RW link is interesting for three reasons. 1)It does describe the debate with Kerry well AND Gingrich's position was global warming was real, urgent and manmade. 2) The comments are fascinating in how they speak in very negative terms of ALL their choices. (In fact, they used some of the words I was searching for -smug and condescending being the top two. Go back to the 2000 match, and wonder if Gore was hurt by his sighing, do you think that Gingrich wins when his own base sees him as condescending? Note that the Kerry/Gingrich debate had people from both sides watching - even if it seems that the audience was pro-Kerry. (I suspect Gingrich's immediate attempt to win the center by saying climate change was real and manmade soon into the debate, left his people speechless.) There is no way that Obama does not win - if only just on likability.

[Cosmocat]

19. Agreed ...

He just will not measure up well against BO one on one - again, it is funny how he and Rs are all misty about how he would kill BO in the "lincoln/douglass" debates, but take away substance completely and just put those two next to each other in a general election, and on nearly ever level Nwet falls VERY short ...

[asjr]

2. The media are making hay with it. All I see

or hear from them is about Newt and Mitt. The only one in the whole bunch that has any sense is Huntsman and the media just give us a glimpse of him every other week. I guess he is just not mean enough.

[rurallib]

5. and Huntsman doesn't have a lot of sense

[msongs]

3. who will be the republican saviour who will step in at the last second? nt

[eggplant]

8. I long ago predicted a Jeb/Newt ticket....

...I worry that I was actually correct.

[AtomicKitten]

6. I think it was already faded this time right out of the gate.

[Pirate Smile]

9. Mittens didn't have a great day yesterday:

*** Getting snippy with it: Yet perhaps the most revealing part of Romney’s FOX interview was his tone, especially when he was challenged on flip-flopping on key issues or on his Massachusetts health-care law. The New York Times called his responses “snippy,” while the Miami Herald said he was “icily peevish.” When FOX’s Baier noted that Romney had changed his positions on climate change, abortion, immigration, and gay rights, the GOP candidate responded, “Your list is just not accurate. One, we’re going to have to be better informed about my views on issues.” And when Baier asked him about Massachusetts’ health-care mandate, Romney replied, “Bret, I don't know many hundred times I've said this, too. This is an unusual interview. All right, let's do it again,” he said sarcastically before adding: “Absolutely what we did for Massachusetts was right for Massachusetts.”

*** Explaining why Romney is the favorite but still not the front-runner: If you want to understand why Mitt Romney is the favorite to win the GOP presidential race but is not the front-runner, just watch the interview. That’s why he hasn’t put this contest away, at least not yet. He is having a very difficult time dealing with how some of his previous positions -- like on health care -- that are inconsistent with where the Republican Party is today. Also, we now know why he has been avoiding these kind of one-on-one interviews. And given how yesterday went, we’re guessing securing one-on-one interviews with Romney on Sunday shows or with national reporters is going to get harder before it gets easier?

*** Disciplined vs. over-disciplined: Here’s one more point about the FOX interview: Mitt Romney's biggest improvement from his presidential bid four years ago has been his discipline -- he's going to talk about the economy and President Obama, and stick to those topics. In fact, his discipline is what has separated him from Herman Cain, Newt Gingrich, and Rick Perry. But is there a point when a candidate becomes over-disciplined? Indeed, nearly every time Romney has been challenged on a topic other than the economy and President Obama (like his own record or debate protocol), it appears to get under his skin. But if there’s anything we’ve learned about the U.S. presidency over the past 10 years, it’s that a president often doesn’t get to focus on the issues he wants to. Just when you’re planning to push for immigration reform, an event like 9/11 happens. Or when you want to talk about the economy, there’s a major oil spill in the Gulf Coast.

*** Getting snippy with it, Part 2: But Romney’s FOX interview wasn’t his only testy moment of the day. After reporters following him in Florida tried to ask him several questions, Romney responded: "Guys we have press avails and press conferences almost every day, and that's when I answer the questions. When I'm meeting people it’s not a good time to answer questions that are important. They're important and they require good attention and a thorough answer." But as NBC’s Garrett Haake points out, Romney doesn’t hold press avails and press conferences “almost every day.” In fact, he has held just six avails in the past two months (Oct. 11 in Lebanon, NH; Oct. 22 in Manchester, NH; Oct. 26 in Fairfax, VA; Nov. 11 in Mauldin, SC; Nov. 19 in Nashua, NH; and Nov. 23 in Des Moines, IA).

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/11/30/9114880-first-thoughts-romney-vs-gingrich

[fugop]

10. Wow.

I can't stand Romney, but wow. The press is really giving him the Gore treatment, aren't they? I actually loved Gore, and it killed me to watch the press decimate him over and over, from putting words in his mouth to sneering at his makeup in debates. But the coverage of Mittens here - using "icily" and "peevish" and "snippy" - really reminds me of Gore. No matter what he said, the press had to editorialize not about the substance of what he said, but about how they perceived he said it. It created an impression of him that he never could shake. It drove me crazy to see it happen, because they never just reported what he said. It was always with some contemptuous adjective about his delivery.

Interesting that they're doing the same to Mitt. They really don't want him as the candidate, do they? Not enough juicy stuff to salivate over with him, I guess.

I'm sure Perry would have gotten the Bush treatment - all Bush's adjectives were things like "affable" and "amiable" and "likeable." If Perry weren't so .... well, stupid isn't the word, because Bush was stupid, but he was able to hide behind his "aw shucks" thing. Perry can't. He's a car salesman and can't hide it.

Anyway, good to see that it's not just Dems getting the nasty adjectives for once. I'm sure once the GOP selects a nominee, though, it will settle back to business as usual.

[Tarheel_Dem]

11. I've seen cardboard cutouts with more personality.

:puke:

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

14. That's quite a choice the Republicans have

Which of the Three Stooges is cooler? Do they choose the adulterer? Do they choose the flip-flopper? Or do they choose the adulterer/flip-flopper?