2012 GOP Poll Update - Bachmann Chasing Romney in New Hampshire and Texas

From Public Policy Polling: Michelle Bachmann has made a significant jump in the polls in New Hampshire with Romney at 25% and Bachman at 18%, followed by Sarah Palin (unannounced) at 11%. In April’s survey, Bachmann was at 4% - these polls suggest a fluidity in the early stages of the GOP, with any one candidate capable of making a “come from behind” advance, however, a candidate such as Bachmann, (or a Sarah Palin), must fight the anti-feminist sentiment towards women running for a higher office (regardless of the political party), therefore, this leap suggests that Bachmann is a force to be reckoned with. Although Public Policy Polling suggests that Bachmann (and Palin) are “Tea Party” candidates, the numbers apparently do not add up when viewing the marginals. The percentage of voters identifying themselves as “Tea Party”, do lean more towards Bachmann, however, she also picks up points from those identifying themselves as Republican primary voters in the Granite State. What might be seen as most significant to Team Romney is the fact that this surge for Bachmann is literally in Romney’s back yard, as he has a home in New Hampshire as well as Massachusetts, which borders New Hampshire.

In Texas polling by the same firm Rick Perry, Govenor of Texas, takes the lead in his home state with 31%, Romney at 15% and Bachmann at 11%. However, with Perry taken out of the mix, Romney and Bachmann are “neck and neck”: Romney at 17% and Bachmann at 16%.
Public Policy Polling, known as a Democrat leaning pollster, does place a great deal of emphasis on “Tea Party” versus “Republican Party”, however, those in the polling booth understand that both parties carry similar ideals, the Tea Party founded basically on Fiscal Conservatism, made up of individuals from all aspects of the political spectrum, which happens to include Republicans as their anti-tax, fiscally conservative stance is on the “same page” as the Republican Party. Therefore, it goes without saying that a Tea Party or Republican Candidate would be, at this present time (and into 2012) preferable to the incumbent. The use of “Tea Party”, is a warning bell for those “elite” who really do not understand the premise of the movement, rather see this movement as a threat to their preferred “Big Government”, liberal views.

It should be noted that if both Palin and Perry enter the fray, these numbers are subject to change, in addition, those that may come from behind, such as Tim Pawlenty, or a front-runner like Mitt Romney may find themselves with roles reversed – there has been two debates to date, both early in the scheme of things, and those debates, as well as the grassroots organizations built on the ground in early primary and caucus states (the most important being South Carolina), will eventually give the GOP in 2012, with two to four competitive candidates, a real horse race. The early primary states leading up to Super Tuesday, are so diverse in nature, that it is difficult for anyone to appeal across the board – New Hampshire running Republican/Conservative/Tea Party, with Iowa seen as an “Evangelical Christian” stronghold, and South Carolina as the Southern Tip off – one cannot win the nomination without either winning or tying in South Carolina.

From this perspective, although one would like to see both the fiery Texas Govenor enter the race, and Sarah Palin come in as well, (those who might think there is not enough room for two women in the same arena, should check their sexism at the door), would make this the most competitive GOP field in history. The exchange of ideas from such a diverse group of individuals would allow the small group that does watch these debates (political junkies and GOP primary voters, and the media) an ability to hear, first hand, the beginnings of each of the candidates “talking points” and ideas. One has to understand that in the debate arena of 2008, by the 3rd debate, all competitors (from both political parties) were being somewhat repetitive – it would be refreshing to see debates where the “same old talking points” were at the very least rephrased – freshened up a bit. That’s the candidate who would gain the attention – the individual who is able to communicate to all watchers or attendees without rehashing last week’s lines, and without the use of ludicrous slogans (A slogan is fine but once it’s repeated ad nausem in multiple settings it becomes – annoying: Example: “Yes, We Can” (used by both Deval Patrick and Barrack Obama in back to back campaigns) – Yes, we can – do what? After a point no one in the “crowd” has a clue as to exactly what it is that can be done – sounds snappy – but that’s about the end of it. (One can be sure there were others from both sides, but less memorable or perhaps just a bonus for living in Massachusetts and having heard the slogan not once, but twice, repeated constantly on air and by the candidates from 2006 to 2008.)