US-2012 Primary: 36% Gingrich, 23% Romney, 12% Paul (Fox 12/5-7)

Fox News / Anderson Robbins Research (D) / Shaw & Company Research (R)
12/5-7/11; 356 likely Republican primary voters, 5% margin of error
911 registered voters, 3% margin of error
Mode: Live telephone interviews
Fox release

National

2012 President: General Election
44% Obama (D), 42% Romney (R) (chart)
46% Obama (D), 40% Gingrich (R) (chart)

2012 President: Republican Primary
36% Gingrich
23% Romney
12% Paul
8% Perry
5% Bachmann
4% Santorum
2% Huntsman
(chart)

Comments

[Symanski]

04:23 PM on 12/09/2011

GOP enthusiasm on the decline, likely due to the cast of clowns that they have running: http://www.salon.com/2011/12/08/the_gops_sudden_enthusiasm_problem/singleton/

Once the party unites around a candidate the GOP is trying to sink (Gingrich; read today's TNR piece about the dozen+ Republicans out there screaming about Newt) or a candidate they've never liked (Mitt, 2008 and 2011), that number will be much better for the GOP.

[StatsNo1fan]

12:24 PM on 12/09/2011

I found the last honest liberal pollster standing. Morning Call of PA. B0/Mitt - 45/41. B0/Newt - 52/35.

[Symanski]

01:48 PM on 12/09/2011

What are you suggesting?

[Rightbrainedleftwinged]

11:26 AM on 12/09/2011

I think the polling firms, other than Rasmussen have a lot more liberals than conservatives running them, and perhaps are doing something a little sneaky not using everyone they poll, or use a pool of those more likely to show up to the polls, to make it look to Republicans like Gingrich is doing better than Obama than he is. If Gingrich polls within 3 points of Romney, vs Romney who may look like he could win enough electoral votes to become president, conservatives may still vote for the Newt.

I think what a liberal polling firm doesn't want is Gingrich's loose lips to sink his ship, and by the time Iowa comes around, states like Ohio could show double digit leads for Obama vs gingrich, but still show Romney tied with Obama.

If the GOP was not just a party of social, conservative, homophobic freaks, and Guilliani had run, hell he might have beaten Obama in a landslide. I mean, it had him winning by 5 points over Obama in NY.

[StatsNo1fan]

12:02 PM on 12/09/2011

Wow, you accuse "polling firms, other than Rasmussen" to be run by liberals and of cheating???!!!

Wow, just WOW!

[StatsNo1fan]

12:04 PM on 12/09/2011

They should be investigated!

[ashenthorn]

11:02 AM on 12/09/2011

Mitt since July: 26, 26, 22, 23, 20, 22, 23. Yep - he's really going places.

[StatsNo1fan]

11:58 AM on 12/09/2011

What about everyone else's numbers? Since July?

Unless Huntsman somehow catches fire, it's looking more and more than Mitt will persevere in the end. IMO.

[Romo2Austin]

12:38 PM on 12/09/2011

you need more than 23 to win. That is what happened to Howard Dean. He could never get over 33%

[GoTo123]

04:28 PM on 12/09/2011

Stat actually has a good point. Despite the fact that Newt is leading in a bunch of early primary states and is the favored candidate right now, one must not overlook super delegates. The Republican establishment knows that Newt is weaker than Romney and has too much baggage. The superdelegates could play a decisive role in handing the nomination to Romney.