« PPP: Romney up by 8% over Gingrich in Florida | Main | NBC News/Marist poll: Mitt Romney leads Newt Gingrich by 15 percent in Florida »

Miami Herald/Tampa Bay Times poll: Mitt Romney by 11% over Newt Gingrich

Newt Gingrich swaggered into Florida as a Republican front-runner, but now he’s close to slipping out as an also-ran against a resurgent Mitt Romney.

Gingrich is badly trailing Romney by 11 percentage points, garnering just 31 percent of likely Republican voters heading into Tuesday’s presidential primary, according to a Miami Herald/El Nuevo Herald/Tampa Bay Times poll released late Saturday night.

President Barack Obama should be wary as well. Romney beats Obama by a 48-44 percent spread — a lead inside the error-margin, however — in a theoretical general-election matchup, the poll shows.

In the Republican primary, Romney’s lead looks insurmountable. It cuts across geographic, ethnic and gender lines. And the poll indicates Romney’s attack on Gingrich as a Freddie Mac insider is a hit with GOP voters.

“What does Gingrich need to do? I would say Romney would need to implode,” said Brad Coker, pollster with Mason Dixon Research & Associates, which conducted the survey from Tuesday through Thursday.

“If there’s no 11th hour surprise,” Coker said, “this race is looking right now like it’s over.”

Late Saturday, former GOP presidential candidate Herman Cain endorsed Newt Gingrich, but it's unclear how that could help Gingrich make up such a big deficit.

Rick Santorum and Ron Paul — who did not campaign in Florida — are running well behind and have little chance of pulling into serious contention in the nation’s largest swing state, which holds 50 of the 1,144 delegates needed to help secure the GOP’s nomination at this summer’s convention in Tampa.

Late Saturday, former GOP presidential candidate Herman Cain endorsed Newt Gingrich, but it's unclear how that could help Gingrich make up such a big deficit.

Romney is running strongest in Southeast Florida, from the Keys to the Treasure Coast. About half of all voters favor him here. Gingrich gets about a quarter of the vote. Similarly, 52 percent of Hispanic voters favor Romney, compared to just 28 percent who support Gingrich.

Full story here

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/01/28/2613266/poll-romney-holds-big-lead-over.html#storylink=cpy


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


The Establishment desperately wants this over, before Newt can rally the Conservatives, get rid of Santorum, and expose Romney as the liar he is. Unfortunately, it aint happenen. GO NEWT!


It will be over by end of Tuesday
Romney 2012


What's with this term "establishment" and "elite" being used for Romney supporters?

Newt can't win women voters. Many of us find his philandering too much.

I just read a timeline of Newt’s divorces etc.

Did you know he married when he was 19 and his wife was 26? She was his former Geometry teacher and he carried on with her during high school. I guess his sexual promiscuity got an early start. He has no boundaries.

Tea Party Patriot

Looks like "Moon-Newt" is about to have is enormous sized ago brought back to earth....Ouch.


Thanks Florida! Pease don't disapoint the rest of us and change your mind. Vote for Romney!!!!!

Dr. Thomas Wiley, Md.   FACOG

HOW MANY AMERICAN VOTERS ARE "CHRISTIAN"? Well, the answer is 75%. That is a big number. So, what is the point?

Well, Newt is "now" a Catholic and says he has been forgiven. I can handle that.

However, Romney believes a guy in upstate New York named Joe Smith dug up some golden plates before the turn of the century and decided they translated into THREE extra books of the bible and he believes that JESUS CHRIST ACTUALLY, PHYSICALLY TRAVELED TO THE U.S. AND WENT TO THE MISSISSIPPI VALLEY AND ON....


NOW THIS WAS NOT 2,000 YEARS AGO! Folks, Romney believes all of this occurred about the time his great-great-grandmother was born!

There are also the magical underwear and the cult-like description that many in mainstream academia and religion have placed upon the Mormon faith...I do not know about you but i will take the smart as.s fat guy anyday, who cheated on his wife over the PERFECT guy who believes Jesus visited Ole Miss and who has a whole host of friends who believe it is fine to marry ten women!

Dr. Thomas Wiley, Md.   FACOG





Jarad Van Wagoner

Mitt Romney is a principled man who values his faith, his family and his country. These are the things that compel him to serve, not an ego attached to grandiose ideas. The efforts by some "Christians" to oppose the nomination of a Mormon is a bit embarrassing. I believe the purpose of the blatant bigotry is the lack of confidence in their own beliefs. These "Christians" fear that the nomination of a Mormon will validate/legitimate Mormon beliefs and doctrine and that somehow that will diminish their own faith. If you're secure in your own faith and beliefs, the leadership of a man who lives principles that any true Christian would find admirable should not be an issue.

Where confidence lacks, bigotry reigns.

Chris Pounds

I don't understand how any of you can vote for Newt or Romney,both take money from goldman sachs,flip flop,want bigger government and are for war.Just doesn't make sense that this many Americans are asleep to the truth.Turn off Fox and WAKE UP!! Ron Paul 2012.

Dr. Sanje Gumpta Md SFMCDCAP

HOW MANY AMERICAN VOTERS ARE "CHRISTIAN"? Well, the answer is 75%. That is a big number. So, what is the point?

I don't believe the above statement is true.Romney and Newt are just telling people what they want to hear.I am sorry if one of these two idiots get the nomination i am voting for Obama.I don't like Obama,but he has done more for Americans than G.W.Bush did for us and Romney will be no better than Bush.

Dave Longdale

Democracy? The next election is shaping up to be as big of a sham as the last. Do you know why Sarah Palin's bus tour was really canceled? Do you know why she stayed 30 miles away from the second debate and chose the death of Steve Jobs to announce that she's not running? Know what leaked out? Sarah Palin and Cain aren't in the race for the same reason, the truth leaked out.


If Floridians want Obama to be re-elected, they should vote for Mitt Romney. If you want a chance - a chance - at beating Obama, you should vote for Newt Gingrich. Newt is the most electable in the general election race against the President. If Mitt Romney were to win the nomination, he will lose in a LANDSLIDE (every state) to President Obama come November. Firstly, Romney lost the primary in 2008 to McCain, who, in turn was soundly defeated by President Obama. Thus, Romney lost to the guy who lost to President Obama. Secondly, Romney lost the Iowa primary this time around to a man whom most folks in Iowa had never heard of a month prior to the primary election, even though Romney had run there four years ago and had name recognition. Romney’s PAC spent four million dollars attacking Newt Gingrich in Iowa (just as Romney and his PAC have spent a staggering TWELVE MILLION DOLLARS to attempt to defeat Gingrich in Florida). At the end of the day, Romney beat Gingrich in Iowa, but lost overall to a former PA senator. If Romney could not even win Iowa against Santorum, he will surely not win a single state against President Obama. To win the Presidency as a Republican, you must win the South. South Carolinians soundly rejected Romney and they will reject him in the general election. Romney may do well in the liberal Northeastern states during the general election, but the blue states will undoubtedly go to President Obama, regardless of who the Republican nominee is. Bush had to carry the entire South to beat Gore, and then Kerry. If Romney is the nominee, he will not carry a single southern state, due, in large part, to his elitism, his flip-flopping(remember Bush’s successful mantra against Kerry) on positions, his lack of sincerity, and, his ties to the liberal North East. Gingrich will carry the South in the general election. The core convictions of the individuals who identify themselves as conservatives and/or Republicans render Romney unelectable. Even though Hillary Clinton did exceedingly well against Obama in the 2008 primary cycle, at the end of the day, Democrats were able to coalesce and support Obama in the general election. This was so, because there were not vast differences between Obama and Clinton, and, there were not vast differences in the convictions of their supporters. Vast differences, however, exist between the core convictions of the voters who support Gingrich/Santorum/Paul and those of the voters who support Romney. If these early primaries are any indicator, the voters who support Gingrich/Santorum/Paul far outweigh the number of voters who support Romney. These are folks like me – a lof of them. This woman voter would vote for Gingrich, Santorum or Paul in the general, but I will not vote for Romney, if he wins the primary. I have watched nearly every debate this primary season, studied the candidates closely, and, I have tried – truly tried – to find some compelling reason to vote for Mitt Romney if he becomes the Republican nominee. I cannot find one. Romney may win the nomination - and the people of Florida will be the decisive factor in this. But, your vote for Romney in February, will be a vote for Obama in November.

Joanne Renshaw

Romney lies and deceptions - January 23, 2012 Florida GOP debate:

Said he cut taxes in Massachusetts.
Marriage licenses from $6 to $12; gun registrations from $25 to $75; a used-car sales tax $10 million; gasoline deliveries $60 million; real-estate transfers $175 million; $10 fee per Certificate of Blindness ; billed blind people $15 each for discount-travel ID cards. Proposed $170 million in higher business taxes, the legislature approved $85 million increase.

Romney's Tyler Charitable Trust pledged in 2007 to divest in companies that do business in Iran.
In 2007 and 2008, the charity purchased and sold investment shares in companies that dealt with Iran, among them Schlumberger, Gazprom and Total.”

Bain Capital..."We didn’t do any work with the government."
Romney served on the board of, and personally pocketed more than $500,000 from Damon Corporation. During Romney's tenure, Damon fraudulently swindled Medicare out of millions of dollars and pled guilty to $25 million in Medicare fraud and paid a record $119 million fine.

Claimed President Obama "threw Israel under the bus," ...
Jewish leaders' praise:
Defense Minister Barak said he "can hardly remember a better period of support."
Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon said, "We have not had a better friend than President Obama."
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called President Obama's actions a "badge of honor."
President Shimon Peres said, "Thank you, President Barack Obama, for your leadership, for your deep and moving ongoing and unwavering commitment to the peace and security of our land.”

Said he comes from “the real streets of America.”
Attended Cranbrook School in Bloomfield Hills, a private boys preparatory school; sold stocks to support himself in college; filthy rich parents as backstop and support-mechanism; evaded draft to do missionary work in France and to attend BYU and Harvard.

Called his wealth "an asset to help America."
He holds millons in infamous tax havens that are costing the American taxpayers $100 billion annually.

Attacked Gingrich about Fannie and Freddie, the mortgage giants he slams for their role in the housing crisis.
He himself has been enriching himself for years off investments in both firms.

Said he opposes "rounding people up and deporting them."
Has said that those who come to the United States without documentation should "go back home and get in line with everyone else"—and has made it clear that includes those who have been here for decades and served their community or our military.

Claimed Romneycare was never intended to be a model for a national plan.
In 2007, Romney said in a Baltimore speech that he hoped Romneycare would be a "model for the nation."

Claimed he hadn't seen the attack ad against Gingrich.
At the end of the ad he said, in Spanish "I am Mitt Romney. I am running for president, and I approve this message."

Joanne Renshaw

Is Newt Gingrich mentally ill? Can we risk having a mentally ill person in the White House? Newt Gingrich's mother was bipolar. There seems to be a combination of genetic and environmental factors involved in the generation of the illness. Onset of symptoms of bipolar disorder seems to be tied with stress: Delusional, sexually promiscuous, pompous, erratic, undisciplined, angry, arrogant, anti-intellectual, grandiose, authoritarian, manic-depressive, sneering, preening, opportunistic, divisive, spendthrift, hypocrite, prevaricator.



COUP attempt against Gingrich

Newt did not take the REBELLION lying down.

Gingrich’s precipitous fall from power


I first met Newt Gingrich 17 years ago at a Destin, Fla., fundraiser held in my honor ....

If, as Shakespeare wrote, what’s past is prologue — and it often is —

then Gingrich’s political history is particularly relevant now.

It’s a history I know well because I was there.....

Three years into his speakership, the man who helped draft the Contract With America began trying to undo some of that document’s key provisions. ...

In April 1997, Gingrich ... was ready to be a kinder and gentler Republican by negotiating away the very tax cuts that he had once called “the crown jewels of the contract.”

Soon, conservatives were being pressured to vote for big spending appropriations bills.

In his final speech from the floor of Congress,
Newt Gingrich lashed out wildly at the same freshmen who had made him speaker — mocking us as cannibals ...

It was the last time Newt would attack
the most conservative members of his caucus
from the lofty perch as speaker.

In 1997, ten of my fellow classmates had
led a coup attempt against Gingrich,
shutting down the House over the speaker’s efforts to violate the Contract with America ....

Conservative stalwarts like Steve Largent, Tom Coburn and Matt Salmon joined me and seven others to demand a cut in spending and a promise to hold firm on tax cuts.

Newt did not take the rebellion lying down.
He immediately summoned the sergeant of arms
to drag the 11 rebels down to a Republican caucus meeting ...

where Newt lined us up in front of a packed room of seething House members ...

Gingrich then began screaming and demanded that the 11 of us account for our behavior.

As Steve Largent grabbed the microphone, ...
Steve spoke softly about how he signed a contract with the Seattle Seahawks ....
A few years later, the NFL Players Association went on strike. But Largent told the mob, who were now transfixed, that he crossed those picket lines because he signed a contract and gave his word. ....
For Steve, it was a matter of principle.

Turning to the Speaker, ... Largent said, “Newt, you were the one who drafted the contract and then told us to sign it.
Now, you’re the one pressuring us to break it.

But Newt, if I wasn’t intimidated by the thought of 250 pound linebackers who wanted to kill me every time I crossed the field,
why would I be intimidated by you?”

And with that, the speakership of Newt Gingrich was over.

A year later, he would be driven from power
and sent into a political wilderness
from which he emerged 14 years later
on a Saturday night in South Carolina.

Gingrich’s precipitous fall from power was the result of arrogance, ...
a fatal tendency to flit from issue to issue — and even from core conviction to core conviction — in the seeming belief that if ....


The Newt I know

By: Joe Scarborough 1-27-2012 POLITICO






Details unfold about
Gingrich’s Freddie Mac Role

Alana Goodman 1.24.2012


New details are trickling out about Newt Gingrich’s role at Freddie Mac, and the latest reports continue to contradict his claim that he objected to the mortgage giant’s business model while serving as an advisor.

Last November, Gingrich’s campaign said that "on numerous occasions in meetings with Freddie Mac, Speaker Gingrich advised that a business model that involved lending money to people with bad credit and no money down was unsustainable and a bubble, and that it was dangerous to buy securities made up of these mortgages."

But according to Politico, his activities weren’t just confined to advising and lobbying on behalf of Freddie Mac. He also rallied an audience of Freddie Mac political action committee donors in 2007:

New details from Newt Gingrich’s $35,000-a-year [ month ] contract with Freddie Mac
show that the Republican hopeful wasn’t just a boardroom consultant, but served as a high-profile booster for the beleaguered organization.

He even gave a rallying speech to dozens of the group’s political action committee donors
in the spring of 2007.

Shortly after the "rah, rah" speech, as one source described it, Gingrich gave an interview for the Freddie Mac website, where he supported the group’s model at length.
The interview is no longer on Freddie’s site.

If Gingich was supposedly the internal critic of Freddie Mac, what was he doing giving speeches to the group’s PAC donors?

The story doesn’t add up. Of course it’s possible that Gingrich brought up his concerns at some meetings, but he gave no public indication that he was trying to reform the group at the time.

Everything that’s been released has shown the opposite – him praising Freddie Mac’s business model and trying to boost the group’s reputation.

Meanwhile, Reuters reported more details about the lobbying expert who Gingrich says advised him back in 2000:

"He hired me to give him advice on state and federal lobbying requirements," [lobbying expert] Thomas Susman said.

"The subject matter," he added, "was simply to advise him and his associates in his business

what the lobbying laws were because he did not want to have to cross the line to register as a lobbyist in any of those jurisdictions."

Which sounds like confirmation that
Gingrich hired an expert to avoid crossing the 20 percent threshold that would require him to officially register as a lobbyist.

The drip-drip-drip will likely keep this issue in the news for awhile, but it remains to be seen if Romney can make the controversy stick to Gingrich.


Details unfold about
Gingrich’s Freddie Mac Role

Alana Goodman 1.24.2012





Gingrich hired an expert to avoid crossing
20 percent threshold that would require him
to officially register as a lobbyist.




Romney unloads on Newt
over debates, Freddie work

Mitt Romney slammed Newt Gingrich for his role working for federal housing agency Freddie Mac [ .... ]

"You know, [ Speaker Gingrich ] is now finding excuses everywhere he can. He’s on TV this morning going from station to station complaining about what he thinks are the reasons he had difficulty here in Florida. But you know we’ve got a president who has a lot of excuses, and the excuses are over, it’s time to produce."
[ .... ]

"... I know how bad housing is here, how tough its been. You know that one quarter of all the foreclosures in America are in Florida? And you know how much home values have gone down.

And one of the greatest contributors to the collapse of housing here and across the country was government, and the intrusion of government into the housing market and the fact that you have Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae guaranteeing mortgages in some cases to people who couldn’t possibly pay them back, that contributed to the kind of crisis you’ve seen here.

And at the time some people were standing up and saying we need to reform the system, Speaker Gingrich was being paid $1.6 million to stand up and do what he did, which is to say these programs should continue the way they are. These institutions are fine.

The people of Florida have had enough of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae and government interference and its time to get back to free market principles."

"So Mr. Speaker, ... Your problem in Florida is that you worked for Freddie Mac at a time that Freddie Mac was not doing the right thing for the American people. And that you were selling influence in Washington at a time when we needed people to stand up for the truth in Washington."


Romney unloads on 'excuse-making' Newt
over debates, Freddie work

By MAGGIE HABERMAN 1/29/12 Politico.com
POLITICO's Reid Epstein reports:




Newt wipes out

By Jennifer Rubin 1/26/2012

Newt Gingrich got slammed in the debate by a remarkably invigorated Mitt Romney, an impressive Rick Santorum and CNN’s Wolf Blitzer, who really wouldn’t let him get away with much.

Romney was clearly on his game, ready to swat down Gingrich. He vigorously defended his success in business and skewered Gingrich on his carping about his capital gains. He tied Gingrich to Freddie Mac and wouldn’t let go, making it clear that Gingrich was a cheerleader for the entity that contributed mightily to the financial crisis. When Gingrich accused him of investing in Freddie, Romney pointed out that they both had investments in mutual funds which held Freddie bonds. On Gingrich’s loony moon colony, he was restrained but emphatic that this was fiscally irreponsible. He gave a very succinct and smart answer on the need to equalize the tax treatment for individually-purchased and employer-provided health care insurance. When it came to talking about his wife he lovingly explained his wife Ann’s fight against MS and cancer. This was a better, sharper, more aggressive candidate than we have seen to date. He very likely sealed a victory for himself in Florida, where he is already leading.

In the lengthy opening segment on immigration he stood firm on his self-deportation stance, on which Rick Santorum backed him up. He did get slightly tangled up by an ad citing Gignrich for calling Spanish the language of the “ghetto,” saying he didn’t know if it was his ad. When Blitzer later confirmed that it was, however, Romney cornered Gingrich, whose defense boiled down to: I didn’t say the word “Spanish.” The Romney team quickly put out its research form Politifact showing that Romney’s ad was “mostly true.” More impressively, he faced down Gingrich for calling him anti-immigrant in a radio ad, reminding the audience that Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) had rebuked Gingrich and forced the former Speaker to take down the ad. For once, Gingrich looked dumbfounded.

The star of the show, however, may have been Rick Santorum, who put front and center the question Right Turn has been asking: Why in the world is the conservative base favoring Gingrich over this guy? He gave informed and forceful answers on Cuba, Central America and Puerto Rico. He took a baseball bat to both Romney and Gingrich on their support for the individual mandate, making the point that conservatives shouldn’t “give away” this issue. He also, with some verve, ridiculed the moon colony. When Gingrich went on and on Santorum had a priceless look — puzzlement mixed with disdain. (The thought bubble above his head would have read: “Did I tell you he was a crackpot, or what?”)

He was eloquent in his defense of the Constitution as the document to preserve the individual rights set forth in the Declaration. He seemed presidential (at one point calling for a halt to the back-and-forth on Romney’s and Gingrich’s personal finances) and infinitely more sober than Gingrich. His closing speech on his appeal to the blue-collar voters the GOP needs to win in November.

Gingrich had a perfectly dreadful night, appearing angry and then sheepish, nasty and then defensive. He didn’t have well-prepared defenses on his time with Freddie or strong attacks on Romney’s earnings. He played to type in defending his fantastical idea for a space colony. And he sniped at conservatives who have forward to question whether he was all that close to Reagan, calling it part of an organized effort by Romney. For starters, that’s called a “campaign,” and if he can’t handle Romney he’ll be no match for Obama; Moreover, I’d be surprised if the Romney camp had a hand in every statement and article that criticized him over the last week or so. (They aren’t that good.) Conservatives have had enough of him, and have come forward out of fear he might actually get the nomination. After tonight they have less to fear. Not only did Romney have the best debate of the primary season, but Santorum’s strong showing should bleed votes away from Gingrich as well.

Finally, Wolf Blitzer did a commendable job, rebuffing Gingrich’s attempt to duck away from a question on his anti-capital gains language. He kept the proceedings lively and substantive.

Winners: Romney and Santorum

Loser: Gingrich


walter lee

The guy above is right. The Bible says the only way to get to the father is through the son, not Joe smith.

That Mormon business is a cult. Ask a reformed Mormon!

Walter Lee


And for cianimrl charges to be pressed against ALL (Boehner too) that have done the insider trading thing. You don't get it. It's not illegal (for them) because that is the way the law is written. Of course, that doesn't make it right, but the remedy is to throw the bums out and change the law.They played the same game with minimum wage laws and equal-opportunity employment laws. They don't apply to Congress and its staff hiring. Likely there are other laws I'm not even aware of that similarly exempt Congress.As for Gingrich and Romney Gingrich has the same record of flip-flops as Romney. Maybe he can make a better case for having changed his mind for good reasons (i.e., not the latest polls) but I doubt it. In the past he's supported action against global warming, Medicare part D, the individual healthcare mandate, NAFTA, GATT, the creation of the Department of Education (in 1979), the fairness doctrine, TARP, and ethanol subsidies. His record on gun rights is poor. He also as a long record of authoritarian proposals which you may or may not find objectionable (death penalties for marijuana smugglers, etc.).Basically, my reasoning in comparing Gingrich and Romney is that Gingrich has often supported big government positions *even when there was no particular need or reason to do so*. Romney on the other hand appears to have a liberal track record because he was working with a liberal legislature, while his statements are a matter of craven opportunism. Hardly an endorsement but there is at least a chance he would be more conservative if elected.As for electability, you probably know that Romney is currently polling better against Obama than Gingrich. While I agree that Gingrich would obliterate Obama in a Lincoln-Douglas style debate (or any other similarly freewheeling format), much more so than Romney, I also think it's a fantasy to think that Obama can easily be forced into such a confrontation. He can run $300 million of attack ads on Newt's character, insist on unreasonably scripted debate formats, and sit back.Feeling better about my choice (Paul) at the moment Reply

The comments to this entry are closed.