Gary Johnson

Gary Johnson Included In New Rasmussen Poll; Campaign Pleased


Tampa – Throughout Gary Johnson's presidential campaign he has talked about how he needs to be included in polls. Well, Rasmussen Reports appears as if it is adding the Libertarian Party nominee to its surveys. 

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 16% of Likely U.S. Voters have a favorable opinion of Johnson, while 20% offer an unfavorable view. Only one-out-of-10 have a strong opinion of him: Two percent (2%) have a Very Favorable view of Johnson, while eight percent (8%) have a Very Unfavorable one. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

Sixty-three percent (63%) don't know enough about Johnson to have any opinion at all.

If Johnson is included by name in the presidential ballot question, up to four percent (4%) of voters might support him. However, the final results show 48% for Mitt Romney, 48% for President Obama, one percent (1%) for Johnson and 3% undecided.

When asked for comment on the new the Rasmussen poll, Johnson Press Secretary Joe Hunter said the campaign was happy.

"Simply being included in the survey  is more important than the number," Hunter said. "Just seeing Gov. Johnson in the poll will invite voters to learn more about him and that is our objective. It cannot be overlooked that we have not yet aired a single ad. Being part of the conversation is the first step, and an important one."


NEXT: Paul-Fest Crowd Embraces Gary Johnson

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Fuck sympathy, Walter. I don’t need your fucking sympathy. I need my fucking Johnson.

  2. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 16% of Likely U.S. Voters have a favorable opinion of Johnson, while 20% offer an unfavorable view.

    Let me guess: the Republican respondants said “I like his support for low taxes, but he won’t outlaw abortion and ban gay marraige so I don’t like him.” While the Democrat respondants said “I like his support for abortion and gay marriage, but he won’t raise taxes or give me free shit, so I don’t like him.”

    1. Or, we like his support for lowering taxes, but we need to continue bombing the shit out of poor brown people around the globe, cause maybe one day they will get a nuke, and we need to continue putting innocent people in prison for smoking a plant, because… for the children. This is how fucking stupid a large segment of our population are. Sad but true.

    2. A strong majority said “who?”

  3. while 20% offer an unfavorable view.

    Saddly Johnson’s aborted Republican nomination attempt was better at informing foaming at the mouth statist warmongering republicans then it was at informing people who might support him.

    1. Nah, it’s the fair tax. Nobody wants to pay a 30% federal sales tax.

      That favorable/unfavorable ratio is devastating.I’d be shocked if Johnson can break .5% in November

      1. Taxpayers and businesses would pay no federal income or payroll taxes, but would pay a 23% tax on goods and services they buy. A “prebate” would be granted to all taxpayers, regardless of income, to offset payment of the FairTax on purchases of necessities up to the federal poverty level.

        23% minus a rebate is Not 30%

        But thank you for pointing that out. I did not know Johnson was a FairTax guy.

  4. There’s no way that 30% of voters have an unfavorable view of Johnson and his policies, because there’s absolutely no way that 30% of voters have any idea what those policies are.

    “Libertarian” is then new political slur-word from the left. Like “liberal” was used by the right since the 70’s to wrap up all the negative connotations of the left, now “Libertarian” is the left’s boogie-man word. Very, very few have the slightest clue what they are talking about, other than the notion that Libertarians don’t believe in the social contract that allows the confiscation of rich people’s wealth to be redistributed to the poor.

    They use “Libertarian” interchangeably with “neo-con” and “paleo-conservative” and “right-wing extremist”.

    I’d love to see the exact same sample treated with a sample slate of candidates with names removed, only positions on the big issues listed. Absolutely zero chance that Obama wins the progressive’s support on that poll. Also zero chance that Romney wins the conservative’s support on that poll.

    Jill Stein might split the progressives with Johnson, but I don’t know who else the conservatives could support other than Johnson. Maybe Obama – he probably tacks to the right of Romney on war issues.

    1. In support of my proposition, here’s the wording of the poll for those who didn’t follow the link:

      1* If the Presidential Election were held today, would you vote for Republican Mitt Romney, Democrat Barack Obama or Libertarian Gary Johnson?

      2* Do you have a very favorable, somewhat favorable, somewhat unfavorable or very unfavorable impression of Gary Johnson?

      Anyone care to guess what the answer would have been had they eliminated the party identifiers? I’m going to guess that the answer on question two would have been: “Huh?”

      1. LIBERTARIANS! Those are those evil people the New York Times has been warning us about!

  5. The LASPAC has been running Obama-Johnson polls in order to get Johnson numbers over 15% (the debate threshold). They figure most polls exclude Johnson, so why not exclude Romney?

    1. I can only dream that Johnson gets over 15%. I would love it. Yeah, Perot got more than that, the 90s were just a fucking weird era, period. Perot was a fucktard of epic proportions.

      We are living in a different era, fuck… a different epoch, because of the internet.

      The liberty movement is catching fire. If we don’t get 15+% this election, it is an absolute guarantee after the next 4 years of Obamney.

      1. I don’t see us getting there. These polls aren’t about reality, they’re about gaming the debate system to get our man on stage.

        1. You don’t see us getting there by 2016? I am a realist, and I totally see it. Working people are going to be so sick of the 2 party duopoly by the next POTUS race, that a 3rd party will easily get over 15% of the popular vote. The Libertarian party is the only legitimate contender. When even such SoCons as Jim Demint and Charles Krauthammer openly admit to this, there is a lot of reality over wishful thinking going on here.

          Now as far as actually WINNING a potus election by 2016? No way, but the GOP will become way more Libertarian by then. Because they have to.

          1. I meant in this cycle. Certainly a lot can happen in four years.

  6. The LP and the Greens have done well enough in recent elections to merit inclusion.

    1. Doesn’t matter what we think merits inclusion, the establishment thinks we are their slaves. Until we prove them wrong, it will continue to be so.

      1. They should include the Libertarians and the Greens for entertainment purposes if nothing else.

        Cynthia McKinney on stage with Obama and McCain would have been epic! It also would have set back the green party further than James Stockdale’s VP debate performance set back the 3rd party movement, but that’s beside the point.

  7. I’d love to see the exact same sample treated with a sample slate of candidates with names removed, only positions on the big issues listed.

    You can basically see the results of that by visiting Here in Florida, for example, the amount that quiz takers agree with the candidates based entirely on the issues is:

    Gary Johnson 49%
    Barack Obama 47%
    Ron Paul 44%
    Mitt Romney 42%

  8. Voting for Johnson and going to volunteer for his campaign. Disturbingly hard to help his poll numbers when he isn’t included in any polls I have taken so far.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.