Mitt RomneyNewt GingrichPollingPresident 2012Sarah Palin

President 2012 Ohio Poll Watch: Obama 46% Romney 42%

According to the latest PPP Poll.

Job Approval Vs. Disapproval:

  • President Barack Obama – 46% Vs. 49%

Favorable Vs. Unfavorable:

  • Mitt Romney – 32% Vs. 43%
  • Newt Gingrich – 22% Vs. 59%
  • Sarah Palin – 34% Vs. 58%

General Election Head to Head:

  • Obama – 46% Vs. Romney – 42%
  • Obama – 50% Vs. Palin – 40%
  • Obama – 49% Vs. Gingrich – 40%

The margin of error in this poll is 4.1%.

Mitt Romney is far and above the best polling GOP candidate in Ohio and is withn the margin of error in this key battleground state. 

President Obama is still in decent shape to take Ohio’s newly thinned slate of electors next year, if a little weaker than when PPP last polled the crucial swing state in mid-March.  Then, he led his closest competitor, Mitt Romney, 46-40.  Romney has closed the gap a little, to 46-42, as have Newt Gingrich (from 50-38 to 49-40) and even Sarah Palin (from 52-36 to 50-40).  In a hypothetical matchup with Sen. Rob Portman, Obama would prevail, 48-38. 

There is good news for the president, though, in that even his close lead over Romney is essentially the same as his five-point victory over John McCain in 2008.  That result comes even in an electorate that reports having voted for him by only one point over McCain—indicating that turnout from Obama’s base is still lagging, as it did last fall, when Portman won election by a whopping 18 points.

Mitt Romney has a chance against the President in Ohio but he will have to step up his game or hopes the economy tanks in order to beat him.

One thought on “President 2012 Ohio Poll Watch: Obama 46% Romney 42%

  1. Two years into his governorship, in February
    2005, Romney announced his opposition to stem cell research. Then, to
    the dismay of his pro-choice supporters, he vetoed a July 2005 bill
    making available Plan B or “morning after” contraception. Also that
    year, in an op-ed for the Boston Globe, he declared himself pro-life.Romney
    says he changed his mind in November 2004, when he met with a scientist
    from the Harvard Stem Cell Institute. Romney claimed in a June 2006
    interview that the researcher had told him: “‘Look, you don’t have to
    think about this stem cell research as a moral issue, because we kill
    the embryos after 14 days.'” Romney went on to say that both he and his
    chief of staff had an epiphany, recognizing that embryonic stem cell
    research cheapened respect for human life. However, the scientist with
    whom Romney had met, Dr. Douglas Melton, disputed Romney’s story. A
    spokesman for the institute confirmed Dr. Melton’s account, saying, “The
    words ‘kill’ and ‘killing’ are not in Dr. Melton’s professional
    vocabulary, a vocabulary used to discuss finding cures for diseases in
    order to save lives.”Was Romney an unseasoned politician who
    changed his views upon deep reflection? Stockman, of Republican Majority
    for Choice, thinks not. “He was a grown man in 2002 and very thoughtful
    and introspective,” Stockman says, “so the fact that he says he hadn’t
    thought through these issues seems very odd.” Melissa Kogut, NARAL
    Pro-Choice Massachusetts’s executive director, says, “It is conventional
    wisdom that candidates in Massachusetts need to be pro-choice to win.
    He ran as pro-choice. As he began exploring the run for president, he
    changed. No matter where you stand on this issue, you should question
    where he stands.” Angus McQuilken of Planned Parenthood says, “When a
    candidate or elected official can move so easily from one position to
    the opposite overnight, it leaves voters wondering whether he has any
    core values.”

Comments are closed.