Skip to content

Latest New Hampshire Republican primary poll (01/06/12)

January 6, 2012

  The latest Rasmussen New Hampshire Republican primary poll–the first since the Iowa Caucus–has been released and it confirms that Mitt Romney is the clear frontrunner and the real race in this state is for second place.

  Mitt Romney is holding strong with 42% of the vote and Ron Paul remains in second place and his poll numbers remain about the same. The good news for Rick Santorum is that he has seen a boost in his numbers since the Iowa Caucus, but the bad news is he is only receiving 13% of the vote at this time. This is up from 4% so he has made gains and with Ron Paul at 18% he has a chance to catch Ron Paul for second place.

  Jon Huntsman is just behind Rick Santorum at 12% and this could be the wildcard in the New Hampshire primary’s second place race. Jon Huntsman skipped Iowa and decided to make his stand in New Hampshire; he has basically been living here for a month so the 12% number should be a disappointment to him, but in New Hampshire independents can vote in the primary and it will be interesting to see if Jon Huntsman will be able to siphon independent votes away from who I feel many independents would have turned to otherwise–Ron Paul.

  If this happens we could see a three way race between Huntsman, Santorum, and Paul for second place and if that weren’t interesting enough we have two debates this weekend and Newt Gingrich always performs well in the debates so we could see his numbers rise on Monday as well.

  While the outcome of the New Hampshire primary doesn’t seem to be in doubt it is critical for the other candidates to either place or show in New Hampshire if any of them hope to be a serious challenge to Mitt Romney in South Carolina and moving forward.

26 Comments leave one →
  1. The Georgia Yankee permalink
    January 6, 2012 9:00 pm

    I think Romney really needs to pile on in NH because I also think he’s not going to do well at all in South Carolina, where his Mormonism is viewed with suspicion by so many. The greater his NH win, the less significant a poor performance in South Carolina becomes.

    Two debates this weekend . . . I think we’re in for an excellent performance.

    Take good care and may God bless us all!



    • January 6, 2012 9:03 pm

      I agree that Romney needs to win big here or else a win will be a loss, I think that Newt could do well in SC and if he gains any momentum from the debates he could hurt Romney in SC.


  2. January 6, 2012 9:02 pm

    The race is on for real and I seriously doubt that New England moderates will decide the outcome as the field moves south to S.C. and then to FL., but the “Live Free or Die” state will have its day in the sun. I must say however, that I for one do not want the choice this fall to be between a far lefty (Obama) and a Mass. moderate (Romney)—its that’s the case I will just stay home!!!!


    • January 6, 2012 10:19 pm

      I hope it doesn’t come to that Ron, but I do not think there is enough of a difference between Romney, Obama, of Gingrich to make voting for any of these big government politicans worthwhile, but there are state races to look at even if you blank the presidential ballot.


      • January 6, 2012 10:46 pm

        Dennis, I know how my state races will turn out, but in New England I know its always up in the air. New England moderates are found in the deep south, but we call them liberals down here—nope, I’m not joking just a simple fact. I need to drop by more often and I will attempt to do that—just so many irons in the fire now. Your post always require some thought to comment on and I’ve been lazy!


      • January 6, 2012 11:38 pm

        I know you aren’t joking, a conservative in Massachusetts is not the same as a conservative down south. Scott Brown is a perfect example.


  3. LD Jackson permalink
    January 6, 2012 10:50 pm

    You are right, Steve. New Hampshire is a race for second place. The debates this weekend may very well have an impact on that.


    • January 6, 2012 11:40 pm

      I wish it weren’t true because it would make the race more interesting, but it still means something as we look for a viable option to Romney to emerge. I am looking forward to the debates even though we probably won’t learn anything knew. I am interested to see if Santorum gets more time now.


  4. January 7, 2012 12:47 am

    I have to agree with the assessment that Romney had better do well in NH, as he isn’t going to have an easy time of it in the South. We also have to realize that he has an edge in money.


    • January 7, 2012 6:40 am

      If he doesn’t win New Hampshire going away he still may portray it as a victory, but it will show the country that the luster is off him and people may begin to think he is vulnerable and it will make it harder for him to win. But then again, as you said, he does have the money.


  5. toldya permalink
    January 7, 2012 8:34 am

    This pretty much sums it up. Judge Napolitano hits the nail on the head. The problem is convincing people that their paradigm is incorrect. People don’t like to be fooled or feel foolish and so they tend to defend their perceptions with great effort.


    • The Georgia Yankee permalink
      January 7, 2012 10:57 am

      It’s called cognitive dissonance – frequently demonstrated by an inconsistency between people’s actions and their beliefs. For example, a recent survey showed that many of the Americans who believe that it’s dangerous to text while driving (or who believe the practice should be outlawed, I forget which) also admit to texting while driving. Tons of smokers believe that smoking is dangerous.

      And in politics, it’s just the same – or perhaps it gets worse. For instance, liberals pretty much ignore those aspects of the Obama administration that fly in the fact of accepted liberal dogma – like government secrecy, the war on drugs, civil liberties, extraordinary rendition, etc. We rationalize these things, telling ourselves that our guy might be disappointing us in these areas, but the other fellow not only would do worse in these areas, but would also annoy us in areas where Obama has lived up to our expectations.

      Honestly speaking, though, it may just be that Ron Paul, on many issues, is the ideal liberal candidate because of his libertarian approach to civil liberties and personal freedom, and his semi-isolationist approach to foreign affairs. Anti-war liberals would have been much more pleased with President Paul than they were with President Bush or are with President Obama.

      Take good care and may God bless us all!



      • toldya permalink
        January 8, 2012 1:49 pm

        Do you have to be a “liberal” to be anti war? How about a conservative who doesn’t listen to the dummies in the propaganda media (FOX included). Perhaps a conservative who doesn’t believe in bloated, centralized government and realizes we are more communist than republic ( 10 planks of the communist manifesto). As far as liberals being for personal freedoms goes. Ever ask a liberal if they support the second amendment? How about the TSA? They’ll tell you it’s for keeping us safe even if we have to throw away the fourth amendment to do so. How about “hate speech”. Well, let’s just toss out the first amendment too. What it all boils down to is there are no liberals anymore. They’ve been replaced by “progressives” and are completely ideologically different animals. The Republican party of today is progressive light and anything to the right of that is called extremism (code for constitutionalist). It’s all word play and they’ve perfected it to an art form. The ultimate goal being to replace the constitution and bill of rights with the UN’s version, which has already been drawn up and is ready to implement. All that’s required now is for the POTUS to declare martial law (back to the NDAA, Patriot Act and a myriad of unconstitutional executive orders) put in place by the last several administrations. Fortunately for us, all laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void (Marbury vs Madison). Unfortunately for us, people will have to stand up when the time comes.


      • The Georgia Yankee permalink
        January 8, 2012 4:46 pm

        Interesting observations and interpretations, toldya.

        I don’t know why you ask if one has to be a liberal to be anti-war, as if I suggested they have a lock on the position, because I never made that implication.

        I understand that Stalin, Mao, Marx, Engels and even Ahmedinijad, as well as the new North Korean leader, all support the use of toilet paper. Is that a good reason for us to renounce it? The assertion that some American practices and policies can be found in the Marx’s agenda for implementing communism doesn’t mean that those practices are actually communist, any more than Marx’s assertion that daily toothbrushing is good for you and that everyone should use toilet paper.

        As to legislation inconsistent with the Constitution being null and void, you’re right. However, the determination of consistency isn’t made by you or by me, but by 9 wise folks in Washington.

        Otherwise, you express some interesting observations and interpretations.

        Take good care and may God bless us all!



    • January 7, 2012 3:16 pm

      Another great video by the judge. He raises some interesting points and make you think, however it also make you realize that we have been scammed and we have done it to ourselves by not paying attention until it was too late.


  6. bunkerville permalink
    January 7, 2012 10:22 am

    I dont know how anyone can think that we are having any kind of a race, That the majority of the GOP voters will have any input. The candidates are dropping based on polls not votes. The interviews are all about polling and who knows what the truth is behind the polls. Simply a handful of people. Lets face it. This is not a democratic process. A couple of States and that is pretty much it, and these States do not confine themselves to previously registered GOPers. Will I watch the debate tonight? Yes. Will my voice ever be heard? No.


    • January 7, 2012 3:18 pm

      I share your frustration even though I am in one of those states, we really haven’t been given much of a choice as Romney is being pushed on us and people are just falling in line. Hopefully when the southern states start voting it will turn the tide against him.


    • January 7, 2012 4:27 pm

      Do you ever think that these polls is one of the ways that the media (in general) controls who gets elected?


      • January 8, 2012 12:01 am

        I most certainly believe that. The media creates these polls and then reports them as news in an attempt to sway voters to a candidate they prefer. There is no other reason why Romney should be leading in Republican polls, Republicans are being pushed to him and really it is their own fault if they allow this to happen.


      • lou222 permalink
        January 8, 2012 6:02 pm

        It is no different than when someone is being interviewed for a newspaper, is it? They ask alot of questions and you answer, but when the final article is written, boy are things twisted around. When I was doing any medical work with the police department for an ongoing investigation, we were told NOT to talk to the media, under any circumstances, just for that reason. And, yes, we are being told it will be Romney, guess we need to just accept that!!


  7. toldya permalink
    January 8, 2012 8:08 pm

    I didn’t know Mao advocated the use of toilet paper! I guess I have to support that too.


  8. toldya permalink
    January 8, 2012 9:08 pm

    Some more interpretations by toldya.

    BTW, nowhere in the constitution is the power of interpretation given to the Supreme Court. Unless it’s on the same page as “separation of church and state” and I missed it.


    • The Georgia Yankee permalink
      February 11, 2012 12:17 pm

      The Constitution is silent on a great deal, not just the concept of judicial review. That doesn’t mean that it is inconsistent with the Constitution.

      If you read it, you’ll find that the Constitution doesn’t anywhere provide for a remedy to actions taken by either the legislative or executive branch that are inconsistent with its provisions. While a great document written by some great men, it did have some embarrassing flaws (check out Amendment 12 sometime).


  9. ImaJWalker permalink
    January 9, 2012 8:21 am

    Ron Paul’s 2002 Predictions All Come True – Incredible Video!


  10. ImaJWalker permalink
    January 9, 2012 12:18 pm

    If you care anything about your Constitution, freedoms and liberty… please pass this video around for those who haven’t seen it, will see that Ron Paul has a squeaky clean record, been married to the same woman for 52 years and is committed to keep the Constitution and YOUR rights free. He won’t take a paycheque from the elite as he can’t be bought.

    Though I’m not from the USA, I know this election will effect me dearly. Please, vote with your heads and not with the media. Ask yourself ‘why’ are they (media) so afraid of Ron Paul?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: