More on the Phony Boston Globe Poll

Martha Coakley up by 15 points (says the Boston Globe)? Doesn't seem right to this Massachusetts resident. Also, the Boston Herald is supposedly going to release a poll showing Coakley only 1 point ahead. Here's more on the polls from Legal Insurrection blog [excerpt]:

Globe Poll An Outlier

Obama wins New Hampshire primary in a landslide!

That was the prediction of the University of New Hampshire Survey Center and most other pollsters prior to the primary. In fact, Hillary Clinton won the primary, causing much hand wringing. This shows us that we need to be cautious with polling data. It is just part of the picture.

The UNH poll released this morning by The Boston Globe, showing a safe 15% lead by Coakley among likely voters, does not ring true to me. UNH started polling on January 2 and finished January 6. Rasmussen, which polled during that same time period, showed Coakley up by 9% among likely voters but only 2% among definite voters. PPP polled more recently and showed Brown up by 1%. The Boston Herald is to release a poll which reportedly will show Coakley with a 1% lead among likely voters.

The UNH-Globe poll is an outlier, by far. The three other polls show this as a single digit race among likely voters, with Brown's voters far more highly motivated. [Added] Even the UNH-Globe polls shows that among the voters who are listed as "extremely interested in election" it is an even race, at 47% each.

Scott Brown Up by 1 -- or Coakley Up by 15?

A new poll says Scott Brown is leading by 1%. This from Public Policy Polling:  

The Massachusetts Senate race is now a toss up. Buoyed by a huge advantage with independents and relative disinterest from Democratic voters in the state, Republican Scott Brown leads Martha Coakley 48-47. ["The Wall Street Journal ranked PPP as one of the top swing state pollsters in the country last year. (11-6-08 WSJ)"]

Brown leads 63-31 with independents and is winning 17% of the Democratic vote while Coakley receives only 6% support from GOP voters.  Both candidates are relatively popular, with 57% viewing Brown favorably to only 25% unfavorable and 50% with a positive opinion of Coakley to 42% negative. 

Here are more details on PPP's poll.

Dems caught with their pants down again? 

Coakley supporters on their way to her rally?

Why is the Boston Herald reporting on "No Pants Day" on the T, but not the new polls? All the Herald mentions is the number of Facebook friends (where Brown is way ahead).

Meanwhile, the Boston Globe reports its own poll shows Coakley up 15 points among likely voters.

Romney Again Manipulates Straw Poll

10/21/07 UPDATE on Values Voter/Family Research Council

Here are the real numbers from the FRC Briefing/Values Voter straw poll, for those in attendance:
Huckabee 488
Romney 99
Thompson 77
Giuliani 60
See: http://www.mikehuckabee.com/index.cfm?FuseAction=Blogs.View&Blog_id=601

+++++++++++++++++++

10-20-07

Mitt Romney is proving that money can't buy him love, only some fraudulent straw polls. He continues to slump in the more honest outside polls.

For the third time now (the first occasion being the CPAC conference in D.C. last March; the second with his fleet of buses in Iowa), it appears Romney sleazed a victory in a straw poll -- this time at this weekend's Values Voter Summit, a gathering of Christian social conservatives. ("Opponents say Romney is stacking straw poll," Boston Globe, 10-20-07)

The Politico just reported that Romney won today's poll over Huckabee by a handful of votes, but goes on to say:

Here’s something important to remember about the poll: The results reflect not just the 2,000-plus attendees at the three-day conference, but also anyone who went online and contributed as little as $1 to join FRC Action, the legislative action arm of the Family Research Council. . . .

Doesn't this tell us all we need to know about Slick Mitt? A Romney campaign official (Mark DeMoss) told his Romney supporter list to do the $1 thing.

Interesting that the homosexual extremist Log Cabin Republicans were at the Values Voter Summit, handing out proof that Romney once openly supported their demands and was pro-abortion. But we can't figure out why the Log Cabinites are so upset with him. After all, Romney was the reason "homosexual marriage" began in Massachusetts. If he hadn't illegally changed the licenses and ordered state officials to implement the "marriages", nothing would have happened. What is this Log Cabin charade all about?

We're also seeing lots of stories on evangelical Christians distrusting him, despite the various big-name conservative leaders endorsing him . . . but then they're widely suspected of selling out for present money and possible future power for their groups. How sad to read today's news of Dr. John Willke's blind allegiance to this dishonest candidate:

Romney’s campaign distributed a news release announcing he had been endorsed by Dr. John Willke, founder and former president of the National Right to Life Committee. Willke said on the release: “I know he will be the strong pro-life president we need in the White House.” [The Politico]

One of our favorite columnists, Pastor Chuck Baldwin, just wrote on Romney's crazy new alliance with Bob Jones III, and his duplicity on the homosexual marriage issue. We're happy to see Baldwin citing the research from our Romney Report, by Atty. Robert Paine and John Haskins.)

Romney Shoots Foot, Not Varmints

Fun and more fun. "Romney's the new John Kerry." Watch this great video of the NH fellow in the hunter's cap who simply asked Romney his position on the Second Amendment -- then got an answer about how hard it is to hit a rabbit with a .22.

Then, you can browse the latest Gallup Poll. For all of Romney's "impressive" fundraising (but wait ... isn't BIG $ in politics BAD?), his poll numbers are PITIFUL. Check out EyeOn08's comments too: "Romney is almost as disliked at John McCain, even though half of GOP voters don’t know anything about Romney. The number of people who dislike him is only going up…"

GOP %
Rudy Giuliani 38
John McCain 16
Newt Gingrich 10
Fred Thompson 10
Mitt Romney 6

Romney Polling Poorly in Michigan

Thanks to Gary Glenn, American Family Association in Michigan, for this tip:

Romney is polling poorly in Michigan. But why? Is it because voters are not yet "familiar with his positions on important issues"? Or is it because they are? If not, they certainly will be soon. At any rate, Romney doesn't appear to be a viable alternative to McCain in Michigan at this point. From the Detroit Free Press:

Romney's name doesn't help him in poll (2-4-07)

One surprise in the Free Press/Local 4 Michigan poll was the weak showing of former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who finished a distant fourth among Republicans and lost by the largest margins in head-to-head match-ups against the top three Democrats.

The poll of Republican voters had a significant plus or minus 8 percentage points margin of error, but Rudy Giuliani and John McCain were both around 30%, far ahead of Romney's 8%. [Newt Gingrich ranked third.] The margin of error in the head-to-head races was plus or minus 3.8 percentage points.

Romney's father, the late George Romney, was Michigan's governor in the 1960s. Romney has been endorsed by at least 50 state legislators and several members of the state's GOP congressional delegation.

Romney spokeswoman Sarah Pompei said while people in Michigan may know his name, they're not yet familiar with his positions on important issues.

John Haskins comments:

Apparently, there are still plenty of people in the grass roots in places like Michigan who prefer facts and truth to the infallible guidance of the "conservative" nomenklatura, more and more of whom are selling their dubious seals of approval in return for cash, flattery, and promises from Slick Willard Romney.

Facts are very stubborn things, even when much of the "conservative" establishment insists the truth is either a lie or irrelevant. How terribly tragic that "conservatism" -- even the "pro-family" variety -- more and more often comes down to respectable collective denial of legal, constitutional, historical, sociological, psychological, theological and moral reality. Reality has terrible table manners and there's nothing establishment "conservatives" detest more than poor table manners. They'd rather just admit that they're really just liberals who don't like bumps in the road.

Establishment "conservatives" -- whatever that debauched word still means -- share the deathwish of the shriveling, wrinkled, contorted remains of Western Civilization. They just want the irritating doctor to go away. A slow couch-potato death, ameliorated by the narcotics of material wealth, is just plain easier than cutting the cancer out. As Joseph Farah (WorldNetDaily) points out, the fatal flaw in conservatism is that it is conservative where Christ, His apostles and prophets -- not to mention the Founding Fathers -- were radical.

Mitt Romney is an empty mannequin, a stage prop whose purpose is to maintain, for another brief moment in history, the illusion that social conservatism and its pathetic political bedmates are still vibrant and viable. On the contrary, social conservatism is being killed off by its own "leaders," lawyers and pundits, for whom the crusade to save American decency long ago became merely a career.

Thanks in part to true conservatives, like Gary Glenn in Michigan, lots of people in that state are not quite ready for their children's culture to die while they vegetate comfortably before their large-screen TV's.

Romney Kicks Off Fundraising with Dismal Poll Numbers

As Mitt Romney kicks off his Presidential fundraising today in Boston, he'll have to hope his would-be supporters aren't aware of how dismally he's doing in the polls. A CBS survey of possible Presidential candidates in the first week of January looks really bad for him.

From a few days ago, on Ankle-Biting Pundit:

"... The big surprise is how bad former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney’s numbers are. They are, frankly, almost bad enough to bump him out of the first tier of candidates. While very few people have formulated an opinion of him (15%), those that have formed an opinion do not appear to like what they see. His Fav/Unfav is 5/10. In the biz, we say his numbers are “upside down.” I cannot stress enough how bad these numbers are."

Romney Polls 4% Among Republicans

Gov. Mitt Romney handing over symbols of government to

Gov.-Elect Deval Patrick.

They must only be SYMBOLS, because the book of STATUTES he's handing over does NOT include a statute legalizing "homosexual marriage" in Massachusetts -- yet everyone pretends it's "legal"!

[Photo: thebostonchannel.com]

So Romney has formally opened his "exploratory" committee for his presidential campaign. As of about 9 pm on 1/3, the "unscientific" Channel 5 poll on his chances of becoming President had 40% saying poor, and 33% saying extremely poor (out of 366 votes). Where does he think he's going with only 4% in a national poll (down from 5% a month earlier), according to Gallup?

Gallup Poll. Dec. 11-14, 2006. N=425 Republicans and Republican leaners nationwide. MoE ± 6.

12/11-14/06; 11/9-12/06
John McCain 28% ; 26%
Rudy Giuliani 28% ; 28%

Condoleezza Rice 12% ; 13%

Newt Gingrich 8% ; 7%

Mitt Romney 4% ; 5%
[+ others all at 2%, 1% or less]

Also, Human Events reported last month in "A Primer on the 2008 GOP Candidates":

... Mitt Romney is an interesting character. Although he is the outgoing governor of the very liberal state of Massachusetts and was named as one of the Top 10 RINOs (Republicans in Name Only) less than a year ago in HUMAN EVENTS, he's not as liberal as he might appear at first glance.... [A]ccording to recent polls, even if you set aside the debate about how conservative he is or isn't, the "Mormon issue" is starting to look like an insurmountable obstacle to his candidacy. According to Rasmussen Polling, 43% of Americans and 53% of Evangelicals say that they, "wouldn't consider voting for a Mormon candidate." For good or ill, that probably means that Romney is unelectable.