Rep. Paul had the highest unfavorable rating as 30% of respondents ranked him very unfavorable and another 29% said that he was somewhat unfavorable. A total unfavorable rating of 59%  was by far the worst of the group. Front-runners Romney and Santorum had unfavorables of only 26%.

Where things get really bleak for the Representative from Texas is when Rasmussen asked the respondents “Which Republican presidential candidate would be the weakest opponent against Barack Obama in the general election…. Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum, Ron Paul, Jon Huntsman, Newt Gingrich or Rick Perry?” – the results:

•   5% Romney
•   5% Santorum
• 11% Perry
• 12% Gingrich
• 19% Huntsman
•  36% Paul

Paul actually polled as a weaker candidate than Jon Huntsman when stood up against the current President and in an election where the mantra is “anybody but Obama” it will be difficult to get the nomination if no one believes you can beat the current resident of the White House.

Mitt Romney held on to the top spot in the poll with 29% while Santorum jumped significantly to 21% of survey respondents. Newt Gingrich pulled in third with just 16% and Ron Paul rounded out the top four with only 12% . Perry and Huntsman both came in with just 4%.

Santorum could have gotten some of his lift from Michele Bachmann supporters needing a new candidate to back. Some support may also be coming from those starting to think that Perry won’t last much longer – but neither of those explain the incredible lift by themselves. Perhaps  Santorum has become the candidate for the “anyone but Romney” crowd. Among “very conservative” voters, Santorum out-polled Romney 33% to 18% and he topped Romney by 5% among those who self-identify as TEA Party members.

Romney’s strong support seems to be coming from somewhat-to-less conservative voters of all ages with incomes of over $100k.

As candidates start their attack runs on the leader, Romney, a national poll showing him failing to get much more than 1-in-4 voters into his camp is a cautionary note.

One important piece of information that came out of this poll is that almost one-third of respondents that chose Romney said they could still change their mind – the highest percentage of any candidate in the poll.

Gallup also painted the results in a favorable light for Democrats by comparing the new results to those in the last two election cycles.

Gallup’s first measure of the 2012 congressional elections shows Democrats with a slight lead over Republicans, 51% to 44%, among registered voters nationally — better than they generally fared in 2010 but worse than in the prior two congressional cycles.

Rasmussen’s poll report takes uses more balanced and realistic language in sharing their results.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 41% of Likely U.S. Voters would vote for their district’s Republican congressional candidate, while 39% would choose the Democrat instead. The GOP led by four points a week ago.

So why the difference? While some of the polling analysis we’ve done in the past has taken deep dives into the questions asked and perusing table after table of results, this analysis was easy – it’s who they asked that makes the difference.

Gallup chose to poll registered voters. It didn’t matter if they’d ever filled in a ballot in their life, their answer counted. With motor-voter in-place, all one has to do is say “yes” at driver’s license time and they’re registered.

Rasmussen sought to understand what might happen if an election were held now. Their sample came only from “likely voters” – people who would actually go to the polls and mark up a ballot.

Part of his statement is correct, the part of the election being a choice. As far as a referendum – you, Mr. Axelrod, are delusional.

First, we have to understand what is meant by “referendum”.

referendum /ˌrɛfəˈrɛndəm/

▶noun (pl. referendums or referenda /-də/)a general vote by the electorate on a single political question which has been referred to them for a direct decision.[1]

How is any election not a referendum? Does Axelrod not believe that the choice of our leaders is not a political question referred to the electorate for a decision? Of course he does. What he is trying to do is change the political question from being about Obama, to being about the policies of Conservative Republicans.

Moderates and Conservatives are starting to believe that the choice is already made. President Obama needs to be replaced, now we just need to decide who his replacement should be. Axelrod knows that if the election is kept on that footing Obama is toast. In Rasmussen’s latest presidential tracking poll, 23% strongly approve of Obama’s performance while 38% strong disapprove.

Soon, the phraseology will be how Republicans caused the current economic mess. Nancy Pelosi has already tried to blame the massive mess the House of Representatives created under her leadership on John Boehner.

What Conservatives must do is realize the goal. Ultimately, we must not repeat the mistake of the 1992 and 1996 elections where H. Ross Perot was allowed to split the GOP vote and put a Republican loss in motion. In the 1992 Presidential election it is well-known that the independent candidate caused the election of the otherwise unknown governor of Arkansas: Bill Clinton. Clinton got 43%, Bush got 37.4% and Perot took 18.9%. Not only that, but many states that gave electoral votes to Clinton would have shifted to Bush had the vote not been split. Whether gauging it on popular vote or electoral college, a split right is a win for the left.

Could it happen again? Unequivocally YES! A separate poll from Rasmussen shows that a split vote will be an advantage to the left-wing of the American political spectrum.

..in a three-way congressional contest with a Tea Party candidate on the ballot, the Democrat picks up 40% of the vote. The Republican earns 21% support, while nearly as many (18%) favor the Tea Party candidate. Twenty-one percent (21%), however, remain undecided.

If Conservatives are split or confused, the election is lost. If instead, we realize that getting a president with extreme left-wing ideas out of the White House is the highest goal, we have a chance. According to this poll, if the Tea Party Conservatives and Republican voters ban together, we have to only inform slightly more than half of the undecided voters that this is a vote on Obama’s failures. If we split the vote, it doesn’t matter how convincing we are – we get another four years of government over-reach. Obamacare will be full implemented, a balanced budget will never happen, business will continue to leave in the face of centrally-managed oppression and American may well become unrecognizable as the leader of the free world.

We may see Trump come out of the shadows. Maybe some other candidate, once defeated in the primary, pulls a Murkowski and comes back as an independent. Both show selfishness and greed for power – not a heart to do the will of the people. If that happens, we must not fall into the trap the Alaskan voters did. Conservatives must rally around the winner of the primaries in order to defeat the most dangerous president in American history.

“Perfect is the enemy of good” - Francois-Marie Arouet (a.k.a. Voltaire)

Sources:
1 –  Wordreference.com: http://www.wordreference.com/definition/referendum