Mitt Romney surges as GOP debate season opens

Mitt Romney has broken from the pack of Republican presidential candidates, who've been languishing with GOP support in the teens or worse for months.

The summer's Republican debate season opens in New Hampshire tonight (on CNN) with more major candidates in attendance; look for them to aim a lot at Romney. A new Gallup Poll out this morning finds that about one-in-four Republicans now support the former businessman and governor for their party's 2012 nomination.

The new survey reports that Romney's party support has surged from 17% in late May to 24% now.

Of Romney's possible party competitors, only one (Sarah Palin) records support in double digits; her numbers edged up from 15% to 16% during the same period, perhaps due to her highly-publicized bus tour and despite growing belief that the unorthodox former Alaska governor will not be an actual candidate this time.

Romney's 8 point lead over Palin is the largest lead Gallup has found since it began surveying the 2012 GOP field last fall.

With Palin excluded from the poll, Romney's lead over the GOP field more than doubles to 17 points, 27% to second place Herman Cain's 10%.

Even with Palin polled, other Republican wannabes trail her and Romney badly with Cain's support increasing from 8% to 9% to pull ahead of perennial candidate Rep. Ron Paul.

The Texan's support faded from 10% all the way down to 7% since May, which will both puzzle and infuriate his fervent supporters, who loyally believe the 76-year-old, 11-term congressman has a realistic chance of winning the GOP nod.

Former Gov. Tim Pawlenty and ex-Sen. Rick Santorum both scored 6% in this poll, the same percentage that Pawlenty had in May but Santorum's support jumped from 2%.

Rep. Michele Bachmann, who has also yet to announce but will participate in tonight's debate, came in with 5%, the same as in May. Former Speaker Newt Gingrich's support dropped from 9% to 5% following the recent resignation of most of his senior staff in a strategic disagreement.

Trailing them were former Gov. Gary Johnson (the same 2% as in May), former Gov. Jon Huntsman (1%, down from 2%) and current Texas Gov. Rick Perry, whose name was volunteered by 1%.

 RELATED:

Sarah Palin was right about Paul Revere

Elisabeth Hasselback blames Sarah Palin for lack of Romney coverage

Romney says Sarah Palin is one of best things to happen for his campaign

-- Andrew Malcolm

Don't forget to follow The Ticket via Twitter alerts of each new Ticket item. Or click this: @latimestot. Our Facebook Like page is over here. We're also available on Kindle. Use the ReTweet buttons above to share any item with family and friends.

Photo: Rebecca Cook / Reuters (Romney in Detroit, June 9); Gary Hershorn / Reuters (Palin on her One Nation bus tour).

Comments

[brody]

This article is a classic Ron Paul smear piece and Romney puff piece rolled into one. When Ron Paul was polling at 12% it wasn't taken seriously and barely mentioned in the media. And now that the poll numbers are supposedly down, it's used to discredit him. The same thing is happening with the straw polls, when Ron Paul wins they're meaningless and not serious, but when a hand-picked establishment candidate wins, like Romney, it's a huge boost to the campaign and proof that the candidate is popular and viable. Just look what happened to the CPAC straw poll. Now Romney is even canceling the Ames straw poll because he knows Ron Paul has a good chance of winning.

[ed helmstetter]

was anyone here included in that latest poll?
i sure wasn`t-
watch tonight`s debate and you`ll see who the real font runner is
ron paul 2012

[George Washington]

What a silly article! XD

Constitutionally, legislatively, and morally, Ron Paul has no equal. His 22 year voting record speaks for itself.
Mr. Paul has not survived in politics for 22 years and maintain the ethics and morality he has by being anything other than stellar.
If You refute the above comment, then I please invite You to listen to him speak about key issues. It is amazing how well he comes across because he doesn’t have to remember lies like other politicians. He understands what is happening in the world and knows how to apply the basic principles of liberty to achieve the real change that America so desperately deserves.
American to American we are all on the same team. So I present Mr. Ron Paul as my Candidate for 2011 and invite anybody to meaningfully and respectfully debate why he is not the best for American and its people in 2012.
Ron Paul = A real change, not for special interest, but for America’s Interests!
Thank You for Your time
Ron Paul 2012

[gahanson]

Everyone gets a boost when they announce they are officially running, Santorum went from 2 to 6%. Once Palin officially that she is running, her numbers will increase significantly more than Romney's did. One of the reasons her numbers are at 17% is due largely to the effort of many in the media to convince everyone that she isn't running. You can expect to see the numbers for Bachmann and Cain to decline once Palin gets in.

[Louis Nardozi]

I guess when you have 10 million, you can buy a poll or two... When you're 17 points ahead, THAT'S why you pull out of Iowa, where Paul's been campaigning.

[Carlos]

Mitt Romney's father is from Mexico, I really like Mitt Romney and feel he is by far the best candidate for the GOP and he will defeat the forked tongued Obama. Mitt is the master problem solver and can turn our economy around and will provide much needed jobs for our people. He loves this great country and knows how to make it rise in all areas to where we as a nation belong.

If you were to listen to most of the distortions and media lies you would not have a clue who this great man really is. He is the our greatest hope of bringing our county back from the brink of financial ruin. Here is an excellent article about someone who knows the real Mitt and what a great man he truly is. http://americaneedsmitt.com/blog/2011/06/09/confessions-of-a-tea-party-romniac/

[Dimi]

Mr Malcolm's article is based on a Gallup poll that surveyed 851 Republican or Republican leaning voters nationwide and has a margin of error +/- 4 percentage points hence the statement that Ron Paul's support faded "all the way down" is at best ill informed and at worst perhaps a chance for Mr Malcolm to express his personal distaste for Ron Paul and his supporters.

These nationwide polls are largely irrelevant anyway.

Why? because preference polls based on a nationwide sample base falsely give the assumption that the President is elected by a national electorate. That’s just not true. Reporting that Mitt "has broken from the pack" in a national preference poll means very little since it doesn't determine how Romney would fare from state to state. Votes at state level determine the representatives of the electoral college who in turn vote for the President. Our votes happen at a state level not a national one.

Ultimately the Republican primaries will be determined state to state.

Now if we assume that nationwide polls are highly accurate then let's go back to the author's assertion that Romney is the clear front-runner. Consider that Romney is now at 24% vs Palin's 16% and if you apply the +/- 4 percentage points to either of their preference ratings then it is highly plausible that Romney and Palin are neck and neck at 20% preference. Hardly "broken from the pack". The candidates know all this of course but its about time that the journalists (and particularly Pulitzer finalists) figure this out. But of course the media is in the business of selling stories. From someone in the business i can tell you this unfortunately trumps integrity too often.

[teo]

if ron paul lose, america lose, hwr i don't trust in these "polls"

[Roger]

I agree with Brody. This article is only covering anything when it's in favour of who they like. This is the only poll you're using too? I'm not following that reasoning. Paul was in the lead in this one and no one reported on it then. Thanks for helping smear Paul

http://strawpolls.info/2012-gop-poll/poll/results.php?pollid=1

http://online.wsj.com/community/groups/question-day-229/topics/can-ron-paul-win-gop?commentid=2478519

I mean come on

[Joe M]

Please, dispense with the editorializing, i.e. "to pull ahead of perennial candidate Rep. Ron Paul.

The Texan's support faded from 10% all the way down to 7% since May, which will both puzzle and infuriate his fervent supporters, who loyally believe the 76-year-old, 11-term congressman has a realistic chance of winning the GOP nod."

10% to 7% is called the margin of error. I notice you don't take cheap shots at any of the other candidates supporters. Any no one bother saying things like "Ron Paul surges" when he polled at 10-12% a couple weeks ago. So ridiculous and transparent.

[PAUL]

Everyone move along. There is nothing to see here other than bias propaganda. Note to author. Will you join the people on the side of freedom or continue to lick the boot of your master.

[Darren]

Everything seemed to be in order until you started writing about Ron Paul... then it turned from just mediocre to rancid crap. Congratulations on your unbias article. Feels good man. Who are these 1 out of 4? Do they even keep themselves informed on the canidates? I'll answer that for you... no, they don't.

[jword]

Agreed saying Ron Paul is a wannabe is a shame. The author or this article apparently doesn't do their homework. You lose all credibility as far as I am concerned.

[Richard Simmons]

It is plainly obvious that Ron Paul has by far the most grassroots support of anyone running for the nomination. Rather than portraying this phenomenon in the light it deserves, establishment media outlets find every opportunity to downplay his candidacy.

It very much seems like there is a concerted effort on the part establishment media spokespersons to pump up status quo politicians and to combat real patriots like Dr. Paul. Such a scenario would indicate that the political agendas of mega-media outlets and the genuine interests of the American people do not always coincide.

[Bob Vondruska]

Don't Believe These Concocted Polling Results!

If you talk to people on the street, on almost any college campus, or talk to retired veterans, you will get a completely different result. The people doing these "polls" are calling the same people from the same outdated calling lists, and worst of all they are calling people on their land-line. So it's not difficult to see why these results would vary so much from a true scientific poll that includes cellphones and people who are under the age of 60.
This poll that has Romney so far in the lead will be completely discredited once the actual voting begins next year, or go to WePolls if you want credible polling!

[Doug]

Oh for Pete's sake, brody, shut up!

[IO]

Mitt Romney is a Serious DB! Good lord people! If you elect him to office, you had better be ready for 8 more years of this recession/depression. We need to come to grips with the fact that Washington and Government is failing! How are they going to continue business as usual when the money dries up?

Mitt Romney is not the man for this job! He is simply cut out of the same cloth as those who got us into this mess.

We as a nation need to be looking past posterboy/girl wannabes and seek someone who actually has a plan on putting us back on a road to recovery. So far, in this season, the only candidate I see that fits that bill is Ron Paul.

Not Romney!
Not Palin!
Not Bachmann!
Not Gingrich!

WAKE UP AMERICA!

[Heather]

Hahah Romney? Seriously? What a joke of a candidate. What republican is going to vote for a pro-cap and trade, pro-bailout, pro-abortion, pro-federal reserve, pro-endless war, pro-mandate shill?

Seriously, every political website I see has Romney's plastic hair paraded around as the "frontrunner", but I personally don't know anyone in the real word who doesn't look at him with disgust. Who are these supposed republicans who like him? I'd like to meet them.

[Cody]

There you are LA Times! Was wondering where all of the bash paul articles had gone! Nice try though ;)

[david]

I love how this article says, "Ron Paul" polls haven "fallen". You mean the polls are fixed in favor of Carbon Tax Liberal Romney. LOL

[evad1089]

'perennial candidate Rep. Ron Paul'

A perennial candidate is one who frequently runs for public office with a record of success that is infrequent.

Seems a little hypocritical. Romney is on his second time running. McCain ran twice (and lost twice). Reagan ran twice.

[Bisky]

It was a CNN opinion poll which just tells you what their demographic thinks.
Most libertarians avoid the mainstream media.

[Bisky]

CNN puts on the likes of Paul Krugman for economic advice. He is the antichrist to the Austrian free market economics of Ron Paul and his supporters. The other day they had a psycho-ologist saying kids don't lie unless their parents do so we should investigate the parents of lying children.
Point is, libertarians and intelligent people don't watch CNN and polling their viewers is meaningless.

[Maggie Carmel, CA]

Mr. Malcolm, I have a copy of the San Fran Chronicle of March 15, 1995. The article is headlined "Feinstein Calls California 'Immigration Disaster.' " This was in testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee in which she also called for up to $100 million in an emergency fund for the Mexican border. More on California's demise is at the bottom of home page of my citizen website www.billionamericans.com
The question is how can we get immigration into the national debate? It's too late for our state, but the nation is ready to fight back.

[matt wood]

He didn't "plummet". Everyone is bunched up together. In NH, he was in second place with 9%, in Iowa, he's in seventh place with 8%. How, exactly, is that "plumeting"? It's a one percent difference. It just so happens that through the vagaries of margin of error, he was at the bottom of the cluster this go round. And he's not losing support either. Where is a previous poll in which he was polling much much higher than 8% in Iowa, such that he has now "plummeted"? There is no such poll, and this entire piece is worthless.

And how about the recent poll where Ron Paul was shown as the only candidate to have the support to beat Obama from one month ago? https://themadjewess.wordpress.com/2011/05/06/cnn-shows-that-ron-paul-can-win-against-obamahe-already-gave-us-obama/

[Clint]

The establishment is so scared of Ron Paul its getting ridiculous. If your a Ron Paul supporter you don't teeter so how are his numbers falling. If you believe in Ron Paul its because what he is saying relates to what you believe. I have never met someone who would change from Paul back to an establishment candidate. Polls are about the most rigged numbers in the world. I have seen numerous articles about the republican race that don't even mention him even though in May he was neck and neck with Palin.

[Poornima Wagh]

I'm always amused when the "lamestream" media such as the L.A. Times desperately tries to put out a hit piece against Dr. Ron Paul, and the effect is just the opposite (people rail against the L.A. Times when this happens, and justifiably so). Remember, the media always discredits Ron Paul consistently because there is a very REALISTIC chance that Ron Paul will win the 2012 GOP primaries, since almost all his predictions regarding our economy and foreign policy have come true and the country is in shambles. There isn't a SINGLE candidate in either of the two parties that has Ron Paul's integrity, knowledge of the constitution or the moral fortitude to do the right thing. I for one will not only vote for him but carry his message forward. Lord knows we need a man like him in the oval office. RON PAUL 2012!!!!

[nader paul kucinich gravel mckinney]

Corrupt media sells corrupt polls
controlled media controlled polls

the red/blue party is in pure chaos
they can't find anyone that will beat Dr Ron
so they keep rolling out new people every few days

[Edward]

Ron Paul (with the exception perhaps of Gary Johnson) is the only choice among candidates of both party's who consistently demonstrates intellectual honesty and a cohesive logic. The right:left, Democrat:Republican, conservative:liberal dichotomies are no longer useful. The true debate is over individual freedom vs. majority rule, constitutional government vs. government by force. It would be refreshing to have the mainstream media address these issues.

Stop dismissing Ron Paul as an ultra conservative. As one who has always considered myself an independent liberal, I thankfully looked past the biased pablum that the media presented on Paul. Read his books, look at his record, listen to what he says, and think about your own beliefs and values. You too, "liberal" and "conservative", may find that you have more in common with Ron Paul than any other candidate of either major party.

[Romney is a RINO]

One could only guess that the LA Times writes their stories for the Ron Paul's supporters. Ron Paul has the largest crowd on the Internet, and Ron Paul is still leading all candidates at Google Trends and Alexa, so the LA Times must be writing these ridiculous articles for Ron Paul's supporters.

I mean, there is something fishy about the LA Times polls/stories; there is something fishy about the number of positive stories that come out for the other candidates in comparison to the number of negative stories for Ron Paul. Google Trends shows how ridiculous all of this is; in general, Google Trends shows how stories about other candidates outnumber stories about Ron Paul, but Google Trends also shows how the public's interest in Ron Paul still greatly outranks the public's interest in the other candidates.

Also, one can simply go to Google News and google each of the individual candidates, one by one, to see the counts of stories per candidate:

On one hand, Ron Paul has the largest supporting crowd of surfers on the Internet, according to the media and the traffic tickers, but the media rarely writes stories about Ron Paul; the number of stories covering Ron Paul on the Internet actually number in the tens, and -- when the media does cover Ron Paul -- the reports/stories are typically full of smears against Ron Paul.

On the other hand, the media writes hundreds/thousands of positive stories, each day, favoring the other candidates, but -- according to the media and the Internet's traffic meters -- Pawlenty, Cain, Bachmann, Gingrich, Santorum, Romney -- those candidates haven't gained any ground on the Internet; despite the extreme bias and favoritism the media uses in propping Ron Paul's opponents up, there is nobody interested in Ron Paul's opponents: Ron Paul's surfers/supporters have still outnumbered the surfers/supporters of all other candidates combined.

In other words, for instance, Mitt Romney has far less surfers on the Internet than Ron Paul, but Mitt Romney still has hundreds more positive stories written about him than Ron Paul has written about him. So, what is going on there?!

The LA Times keeps writing pro-Romney puff pieces, but -- is the the media writing those hundreds of pro-Romney stories so Ron Paul's enormous crowd can read them? If they're not for Ron Paul's enormous crowd, who are they really for? Are they for Mitt Romney's non-existing crowd??? Ron Paul's supporters are the only people on the Internet, if we're to believe the media and the Internet's largest traffic meters, so -- if those pro-Romney puff pieces are not for a non-existing crowd and not for an existing Ron Paul crowd, then -- I ask again -- who are those hundreds of pro-RINO stories really for?

To say it again, one could only guess that the LA Times writes these stories for Ron Paul's supporters, so: Is the LA Times hoping that the crowd of Ron Paul supporters will suddenly morph into a crowd of Romney supporters? (I could tell you, right now, that that is never going to happen.) Or, is the media, in general, trying to start a Civil War? (Ron Paul's supporters vs The Establishment Machine? Ron Paul's supporters are anti-war, so that can't be it.) So, what is the point?

[dougm_94]

"perennial".. "infuriate"... Malcolm has fallen back to the lazy caricatures. It's obvious his goal is to stir up Paul supporters so he gets more web hits.

I gave him a fair and honest chance after the last article, but sadly will be ignoring his column going forward.

The consequence of running a troll blog is that eventually those you are relying on for your web traffic will cease to oblige you.

[Sterling W.]

And then there are Democratic-voting people like myself who, for the first time, are excited about voting Republican — for Ron Paul!

[Romney is a RINO]

What's more...

Bradley Manning is rotting in prison, because he exposed the fact journalists were murdered, but -- here in America -- the journalists don't seem to care much about the fact their fellow journalists are murdered; the media would rather protect an establishment that murders and oppresses than fight against it.

One should question how any single media outlet could ever defend an establishment that is anti-transparency and anti-free press. Seriously, how could any outlet, small or large, support a machine that literally kills/oppresses the press?

Ron Paul would not oppress the media; Ron Paul would be transparent and wouldn't avoid the media, and he certainly wouldn't kill your fellow journalists, so it would be in the LA Times best interest to get their act together and start reporting the facts!

[banh]

Malcolm, Malcolm, Malcolm... get with the program, would you? Go ahead...kick, scream, throw a tantrum... but read the handwriting ON THE WALL . We are done with corruption and bullcrap in politics. It has caused us ALL hardship and loss to believe in the "handlers" we've elected over the past several decades. You don't think that we spoiled Americans are going to take Commie-style or EU style Socialism with another dose of Koolade, do you? No, we're not. YOU drink it, but you'll drink alone..well, in the company of the other holdouts that is.

Read the comments from your own column...you live in an extreme Left city, and LA Democrats right here in the comments know a good candidate when they hear one. We can't tell a good candidate by sight, we have to use our ears and our brains this time by following his record of performance and integrity.
This election will be based on integrity, and if you can show me a more upright candidate than Ron Paul, I'll buy your next round of Koolade.

Hey, would you support a Ron Paul - Dennis Kucinich ticket? Now, that would be a winner. I'll bet LA would go for that big time.

[robyncarter]

I was just trying to point out that while thinking that GOPers are
cowards because they won't speak directly on creationism etc doesn't
hold a lot of water, because drilling Demos on their controversial
beliefs would make them unelectable as well.

[Sigmund Derman]

Romney is the only prominent Republican candidate who has reasonably mainstream views and, as such, he probably is the only one who has a chance against Obama. But even Romney is so far to the right that I would never consider voting for him. Our national problems have solutions and the Obama administration has been moving us in the right direction. Unfortunately, the Republicans have adopted a "rule or ruin" approach with the apparent intention of sabotaging our economy.

For me, the ideal candidate has the following views:

1) The economy. Realize that there is a difference between long term and short term. We need more economic stimulus now to help us pick up the pace of recovery. The stimulus we have had so far has helped significantly but it was too small. In the future, taxes must be raised as part of an approach to balancing the budget. We were strongest economically (in the recent past) under Clinton, at which time the taxes were slightly higher. Even better would be a new, more efficient tax structure such as a flat tax combined with a value added tax.
2) The wars and the military. We need to extricate ourselves from foreign entanglements and cut the amount we pay for the military. We are spending over ten times what Russia spends and about eight times what China spends. This is unnessessary for the protection of our country. Spreading our troops all over the world weakens us.
3) Social security. This is one of the best and most well managed programs in the country. Raise the upper limit for contributions somewhat (say to $300,000 a year) and, possibly, raise the age limits slightly. That's all it needs.
4) Medicare, Medicaid, Healthcare. "Obamacare" is a decent first step but we really need a single payer plan. This would involve extending Medicare to everyone. Abolish private health insurance. Doctors, hospital, and pharmacies would have to take the Medicare reimubursements or leave the healthcare field.
5) Immigration. Enable immigrants from Mexico and other countries South of the border to sign on as workers for agreed lengths of time by presenting their citizenship credentials from their home countries. We do not need to limit this because we need younger workers. Encourage those among them to attain citizenship here if they have a good track record. This will help us achieve a younger workforce.
6) Drug trafficking. Legalize marijuhana and a wide variety of presently illegal drugs. This will take most of the profit out of drug trafficking. Treat drug addiction as a disease, not a crime.

I know that Obama is not on board with some of the above, but he is tolerably close on enough of them that I am going to vote for him.

[NB]

You know a candidate is a good option when the media establishment on both sides of the aisle (right or left) smears, denigrates, or ignores him. Ron Paul has sound solutions to our country's problems and consistently supports individual liberty. He does not offer shallow soundbites or meaningless, insincere platitudes and he isn't in anyone's pocket. Don't swallow what the media feeds you; look at Paul's record, listen to what he says. Go to the source...you might just be pleasantly surprised.

[Peter]

Liberals fear that Romney will be able to make a strong case against re-electing President Obama!