Rasmussen’s new poll of South Carolina is in stark contrast to ARG’s.
South Carolina- GOP Nomination
- Fred Thompson 24%
- Rudy Giuliani 20%
- Mitt Romney 15%
- John McCain 10%
- Mike Huckabee 3%
South Carolina Survey of 863 Likely GOP Primary Voters. Conducted September 26-27, 2007 by Rasmussen Reports
Hat tip: Awakened
All right, Romney and Huckabee supporters, let’s see if you guys still buy ARG’s polling.
American Research Group GOP Iowa Caucus Poll, conducted September 26-29, 2007
- Mitt Romney 22% (-5)
- Rudy Giuliani 21% (+4)
- Fred Thompson 16% (+3)
- John McCain 11% (+6)
- Mike Huckabee 5% (-10)
Margin of Error: ± 4 percentage points.
American Research Group New Hampshire Primary Poll, conducted September 26-29, 2007
- Romney 24% (-3)
- McCain 20% (+8)
- Rudy 20% (-3)
- Thompson 8% (even)
- Huckabee 3% (-6)
Margin of Error: ± 4 percentage points.
Note: All poll results taken from Real Clear Politics. GRAPH WARNING
Obviously, it took a poll like the one in South Carolina to cause me to do more than laugh off the results of the latest ARG Poll. So, I decided to do some research on ARG’s numbers in comparison to other polls taken at the same time.
Notice anything strange? Here are the poll results from four seperate polls taken between September 9 and September 19 in Florida:
Thompson
McCain
Romney
Now, even stranger, notice McCain’s numbers in New Hampshire compared to others taken in June.
Giuliani
McCain
Romney
There are many more examples of this, that I will post once I can get my excel charts working.
Let’s look at South Carolina by itself in May, comparing two polls, ARG and Insider Advantage:
Thompson
Giuliani
McCain
Romney
Now, let’s compare June’s Mason Dixon poll and ARG poll in the state of South Carolina. One must remember that Mason Dixon is considered one of the best when measuring state support:
Giuliani
McCain
Romney
I’m starting to see a pattern. How about you? There are many more, and this post could go on all night long.
UUHHHHH…. If these are true, then I’ll eat my shorts and endorse Mitt Romney as the second coming of Moses…
ARG Polling South Carolina GOP
(Last months in parenthesis)
Sample Size: 600 completed telephone interviews among a random sample of likely Republican primary voters living in South Carolina (524 Republicans and 76 independent voters).
Sample Dates: September 26-29, 2007
He has met his fundraising goals this last week. His supporters doubled his goal of raising 500,000 dollars in one week, bringing in over 1 million dollars in seven days.
Over $1,000,000 raised in seven days for the Ron Paul 2008 presidential campaign. Remarkable!
On behalf of Dr. Paul and every member of the campaign staff: Thank you!!
Kent Snyder
Chairman
Ron Paul 2008
Update: Reports out of the Paul camp are that they will exceed their 2nd quarter totals. Great job to the Paul campaign and his band of supporters.
Hopeless liberal Frank Rich, whose television appearances I can’t bear to watch due to his stereotypical Boomer self-righteousness, proves that liberals are just as nervous about 2008 as many conservatives. His latest notes the similarities between likely Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton and two presidential losers of the past. Money quote:
The Clinton machine runs as smoothly and efficiently as a Rolls. And like a fine car, it is just as likely to lull its driver into complacent coasting and its passengers to sleep. What I saw on television last Sunday was the incipient second coming of the can’t-miss 2000 campaign of Al Gore.
That Mr. Gore, some may recall, was not the firebrand who emerged from defeat, speaking up early against the Iraq war and leading the international charge on global warming. It was instead the cautious Gore whose public persona changed from debate to debate and whose answers were often long-winded and equivocal (even about the Kansas Board of Education’s decision to ban the teaching of evolution). Incredibly, he minimized both his environmental passions and his own administration’s achievements throughout the campaign.
He, too, had initially been deemed a winner, the potential recipient of a landslide rather than a narrow popular-vote majority.
…
Mrs. Clinton wouldn’t repeat Mr. Gore’s foolhardy mistake of running away from her popular husband and his record, even if she could. But almost every answer she gave last Sunday was a rambling and often tedious Gore-like filibuster. Like the former vice president, she often came across as a pontificator and an automaton – in contrast to the personable and humorous person she is known to be off-camera. And she seemed especially evasive when dealing with questions requiring human reflection instead of wonkery.
…
In this context it’s worth noting that Mr. Bush’s desperate lame-duck campaign to brand himself as a reincarnation of Harry Truman is not 100 percent ludicrous. A tiny part of the analogy could yet pan out. In 1948, Washington’s commentators and pollsters were convinced that Americans, tired of 15 years of Democratic rule, would vote in a Republican. Like today’s G.O.P., the Democrats back then were saddled with both an unloved incumbent president and open divisions in the party’s ranks on both its left and right flanks. Surely, the thinking went, the beleaguered Democrats couldn’t possibly vanquish a presidential candidate from New York known for his experience, competence, uncontroversial stands and above-the-fray demeanor.
But they did. What’s interesting about both Gore and Dewey is that both lost the Electoral College by a few votes in a few states. Gore, of course, lost by just over 500 votes in Florida. Tom Dewey, as I just learned from Kavon last week over the R408 Batphone, lost the Electoral College to Truman by only a few votes despite losing the popular vote by four points. As such, Rich is arguing that 2008 — with a divided, embattled incumbent party and a PermaFreeze general election frontrunner — is starting to look eerily similar to the two closest presidential elections of the last century.
I agree. I think we’re looking at another nailbiter of epic proportions. Despite my pessimism, the fact remains that Republicans have a number of strong candidates, many of whom have won tough races in the past and all of whom will run away from Bush after the nod is clinched. But we’re still a deeply divided party presiding over an unpopular war. If the Dems were running Mark Warner, the race would already be over. But they’re not. They’re running a candidate who will perpetuate Boomer polarization, who has high negatives, and who is reminiscent of the stiffest losers of presidential history. But still, the Dems have a ridiculous fundraising advantage and Americans now view them more favorably than the GOP on nearly every issue. This is the formula that almost always leads to an election for the history books.
Moreover, the Electoral College, especially in a Rudy/Hillary race, seems to be looking for ways to produce a 269-269 tie and send Tim Russert into dry-erase-board heaven. That’s because all of the Republicans, Rudy included, are doing worse than Bush in the Midwest and border states while Rudy specifically is upping GOP numbers on the coasts. If Rudy wins New Jersey, Washington, and Oregon, three blue states that are showing statistical ties between Rudy and Hillary right now, and if he picks up the Maine congressional district that Bush lost by only 5 points, he gains 34 EVs for the GOP. But if Hillary wins many of the red states in which she currently leads — New Mexico, Iowa, Ohio, Virginia, and Arkansas — she picks up 51 red EVs, which brings the country to, you guessed it, a 269-269 split.
As such, if you liked the aftermath of the 2000 election, complete with chads and lawsuits and Bush v. Gore, you’ll love November and December of 2008. Will future law students be reading about the Supreme Court’s decision in Giuliani v. Clinton in their casebooks? Stay tuned.
Here are some random thoughts on this Sunday morning for you to discuss while I am up with my 10-week-old son:
- Rudy Giuliani 47%
- Hillary Clinton 47%
- Hillary Clinton 52%
- Fred Thompson 42%
- Hillary Clinton 54%
- Mitt Romney 40%
- Barack Obama 52%
- Rudy Giuliani 41%
- Barack Obama 54%
- Fred Thompson 40%
- Barack Obama 57%
- Mitt Romney 35%
- John Edwards 45%
- Rudy Giuliani 44%
- John Edwards 51%
- Fred Thompson 36%
- John Edwards 55%
- Mitt Romney 31%
Survey of registered voters was conducted September 17.
NYT:
Newt Gingrich has sent so many hints pointing in so many different directions that we’re dizzy trying to follow them all. But now, it appears, he’s made up his mind.
Rick Tyler, Mr. Gingrich’s spokesman, confirmed today that the former Republican House speaker has decided against a presidential run in 2008.
Mr. Gingrich was “presented with legal advice this morning,” said Mr. Tyler in a quick phone interview. “There was a choice presented.”
The choice was to remain chairman of his political action committee, American Solutions, or to allow advisers to move forward with an exploratory committee. But he could not, legally, do both, Mr. Tyler explained.
“So Mr. Gingrich made a choice to remain a citizen activist,” he said.Mr. Gingrich’s flirtation with a candidacy has been long and replete with mixed signals. Throughout the spring, he mocked the other candidates for starting their campaigns so early, and he said then that if a “void” existed after his American Solutions conference in September, he would consider jumping in.He seemed to be leaning against a run when Fred D. Thompson’s candidacy started to spur excitement among Republicans, but as Mr. Thompson’s campaign got off to a slow start, Mr. Gingrich appeared somewhat interested again.
He said that if his supporters could raise $30 million by November, he would have enough to compete. Then, as Katharine Q. Seelye reported yesterday, he set up a “feasibility assessment” to determine his chances, and he said he would make up his mind by Oct. 21. Well, in a rare occurrence in politics, Mr. Gingrich beat his own deadline.
Mr. Tyler said news on an official announcement from Mr. Gingrich would be forthcoming. Mr. Gingrich was to appear on Fox News today at 5 p.m.
UPDATE: The word from Gingrich is that there will be no endorsements in the forseeable future.
- Mitt Romney 24%
- Fred Thompson 16%
- Rudy Giuliani 13%
- Mike Huckabee 12%
- John McCain 9%
- Ron Paul 5%
- Undecided 15%
Second Choice
- Rudy Giuliani 21%
- Mitt Romney 21%
- Fred Thompson 10%
- John McCain 4%
- Mike Huckabee 2%
- Ron Paul 2%
- Undecided 15%
Survey of likely Republican caucus-goers was conducted September 26-27. The margin of error is +/- 9 percentage points.
Rudy Giuliani
Fred Thompson
John McCain
Mitt Romney
Newt Gingrich
General Race 4 2008 News
Hillary Clinton
[WARNING TO INSIDE THE BELTWAY CONVENTIONAL WISDOM CONSERVATIVES: THIS BLOG IS NOT ABOUT JOHN EDWARDS OR MOVEON.ORG]
If one were to believe the fawning praise of inside the beltway political pundits, a shrewd strategist devising a plan on November 8, 2006 for a Democrat to win the White House on November 5, 2008 would propose that a candidate:
1) Change positions on the Iraq War with every release of a new Gallup Poll;
2) Vote to cut off funds to the troops in the field;
3) Slander the commanding general of a successful surge of troops in the field on national television by calling him a liar with a cute phrase worthy of those bewildered by the meaning of “is”;
4) Cackle at, instead of jabbing the knee of, Chris Wallace;
5) Express dismay that the Supreme Court upheld the federal law banning partial birth abortion;
6) Take money from a 15-year fugitive from justice;
7) Have her campaign utilize (and remain married to herself) a bitter, angry man that no longer can contain his Stephanopoulos described temper; and
8] Refused to denounce the idea of teaching 2nd graders about homosexuality.
Yeah, the Hillary is really disciplined. The kind of discipline that McGovern, Mondale and Dukakis had.
Many of even the beltway conservative pundits appear to be guilty, with respect to Hillary, of what most of the MSM is guilty of with respect to the Iraq War: boxing themselves in a position where to recognize reality is to discredit their own prior judgments.
Hillary has not been disciplined since she first met Bill in the Yale Law Library or even before, when she first read The Feminine Mystique.
Nor has she been disciplined since her first vote against tax cuts as a senator or her first move towards defeat in Iraq. She has been all over the lot on Iraq. It’s all on tape. Rush plays her varying statements all the time.
Have Fred Barnes and David Brooks and the rest of the conservative writers not heard them? Have they not seen her votes? If they have, then what can explain their obligatory statements that she is disciplined except that they want to be loved by their liberal cohorts in DC?
Discipline for a liberal that wants to be president means disguising ones liberalism. See the successful campaign in 1992 (see also Perot recruitment)
Teaching second graders about sex is not discipline except for those that really want to teach first graders the same.
Even Bob Shrum wouldn’t suggest that kind of discipline.
I contend that these liberal democrats simply cannot help themselves and that they will not allow our Republican candidate to lose in 2008.
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
“One man with courage makes a majority.” – Andrew Jackson
The HinzSight Report
The Minority Report
Race 4 2008
http://www.win-the-war.com/
Lost in the excitement of this last week’s fundraising efforts were some of the “Ask Mitt Anything” stops he made. David Brody, the respected reporter from CBN, filed this report on Thursday:
- Fred Thompson 27.9%
- Rudy Giuliani 21.0%
- John McCain 12.2%
- Mitt Romney 8.4%
- Mike Huckabee 2.0%
- Too early to tell 16.6%
- Don’t know 8.1%
Survey of Republican adults was conducted September 24-27.
I don’t hold much value in straw poll results, but some on this site do. So, to show that one candidate doesn’t have a mandate on all straw polls, here are the results of the Ohio State Republican Party Straw Poll. They had a turnout of 2,300. From the Ohio GOP official site:
Here is some of their report on the event:
“Your participation in the straw poll not only provides an early indication of how Ohio will vote but also demostrates your support of building a strong grassroots organization through our state party,” DeWine told the nearly 2,300 Ohioans who cast a straw poll ballot.
Now, back to the race
Republican Nomination Preference by Ideological Self-Identification
Among Moderate/Liberal Republicans (N=544)
Among Conservative Republicans (N=1,131)
Republican Nomination Preference by Frequency of Church Attendance
Attend Church Weekly (N=689)
Attend Monthly (N=396)
Seldom/Never Attend (N=577)
Republican Nomination Preference by Religious Affiliation
Protestant/”Christian” (N=765)
Catholic (N=273)
Republican Nomination Preference by Region of the Country
Northeast (N=327)
Midwest (N=365)
South (N=616)
West (N=382)
Survey of 1,690 Republicans and Republican-leaning independents was conducted in August and September.
Jennifer Rubin makes sense of that headline at the AmSpec blog:
With the exception of the omnipresent John McCain and Mike Huckabee (who never met a talk show host he didn’t like), the presidential contenders do not frequent the Sunday talk shows, go on network news or subject themselves to interrogation by CNN or MSNBC reporters outside the few debates they have done.
This is a mistake. Simply put, GOP candidates are ignoring Willie Sutton’s advice. Sutton of course was the prolific bank robber who was said to have replied “that’s where the money is” when asked why he robbed banks. Likewise, the GOP contenders would be wise to go where the voters are, especially voters they are losing.
…..
It is perhaps natural in such times to go into a defensive crouch and stick to the safe confines of Fox News and friendly talk radio hosts. Particularly in a heated primary it makes perfect sense to seek out venues which have large numbers of politically active conservative listeners and viewers. But over time it is limiting and self-defeating for several reasons.
First, GOP candidates need to recapture independents and convince moderate Democrats they offer an attractive platform, not the cartoon positions attributed to them by their Democratic opponents. Explaining why the Bush tax cuts are worth keeping whether you are “rich” or not is a worthwhile and essential exercise not only to getting elected but building support for the policies they advocate.
Second, it is good practice. Debate moderators in the general election and the Washington press corps are not renowned for their sympathetic take on Republicans and conservative policies. It is helpful to practice answering the loaded question and disarming the questioner — as Rudy Giuliani did in the Iowa debate when he questioned the reporter’s premise that higher taxes would bring in more revenue. If you don’t practice in the primary. it makes the general election that much tougher.
Finally, Hillary Clinton this past weekend showed that it is not so difficult for a prepared and polished candidate to survive even the toughest inquisitor on Sunday morning, Tim Russert. Having done so she can claim that “they threw everything at me” but didn’t draw blood. She reached a huge audience and showed she is calm and collected under fire.
Now, it is not a good idea to go into the lion’s den unarmed or unprepared, but for candidates with solid debate skills, defined policies, and a decent sense of humor it doesn’t pay to hide in the safe confines of the conservative media. For individual candidates, the benefits of venturing out into the MSM world can be considerable. And if the GOP is going to start gaining back ground, showing their faces is one way they’ll begin to convince the American people that they do not deserve to be banished to the political wilderness.
Read the rest here.
Flap was in attendance yesterday for the Wilson-Giuliani endorsement, and was able to shot some great video of both the event and the media availablility afterwards.
Click here for Flap’s coverage of the endorsement.
Click here to see all of the terrific video.
P.S. If you are interested in the race for the 2008 Republican nomination (who isn’t after all?), Flap is an essential daily read. No one in the right-leaning blogosphere covers California like him.
If something is about to break in Republican politics in The Golden State, you can bet you will read it on Flap’s blog first.
I sat in on Sen. McCain’s blogger conference call this afternoon. Here are the highlights:
That’s it for this week. Sen. McCain stated he will try to do another blogger call next Friday.
NRO is hosting a Star Trek makeover today with some fun and satirical pieces. Stephen Hayward takes the opportunity to throw out the worst square-peg/round-hole analogy I’ve heard in a long time.
This lack of sufficiency in individuals sounds very much like our GOP frontrunners. The parallels are not exact, of course, but they generally parse out in the following way: Giuliani is Piccard, with his brusque, “make-it-so” personality; McCain is the impetuous and volatile Riker; and Romney is clearly an analytical Betazoid. Each, by himself, has obvious limitations and defects, and thus appears incapable of effectively leading; combine the strengths of all three and the result would be a success.
I just can’t get grip on any of these parallels. I’m glad to know it was a “mid-martini” moment. But take a look at the other articles. Good stuff.
Also, I should note the NRO Editors speak out against a Gingrich candidacy.
According to the man with the sources, the American Spectator’s Washington Prowler, not all of Fred Thompson’s week was spent fundraising in Tennessee:
Earlier this week, former Sen. Fred Thompson met privately in Washington, D.C. with senior members of the Arlington Group, a coalition of social and religious conservatives. The meeting, according to Arlington Group members present, included members who had previously met with Thompson at a private meeting in the spring, prior to Thompson’s speech before the Council on National Policy.
At the meeting this week Thompson answered questions and discussed his views on social issues, as well as his own faith, for more than an hour.
The results of last night’s Rally for Romney were exciting for the MMM crew. We brought in almost $4000 yesterday ramping up our total “take” for Mitt in ’07 to $75,000. Almost 10% of visitors to the site gave a contribution. It was an interesting case study.
There’s quite the discussion going on at the Hugh Hewitt blog with Dean Barnett knocking the viability of activism vs. punditry and Patrick Ruffini chiming in with a good rebuttal. The question: does online activism really matter or is the influence of pundits more important? (Dean just responded again and again here).
My two cents: Dean is right that the influence of blogs is overstated but Patrick is right to note that the future ma be owned by the blogs. Your thoughts.
Interesting…
Rasmussen Reports Daily Republican National Primary Tracking Poll
- Thompson – 24%
- Giuliani – 22%
- Romney – 12%
- McCain – 9%
- Huckabee – 7%
Daily tracking results are from survey interviews conducted over four days ending last night. Each update includes approximately 600-650 Likely Republican Primary Voters. Margin of sampling error for each is +/- 4 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.
- Rudy Giuliani 48%
- Fred Thompson 12%
- Mitt Romney 8%
- John McCain 7%
- Hillary Clinton 4%
- Barack Obama 4%
- Don’t Know 14%
Among those with a preference
- Rudy Giuliani 56%
- Fred Thompson 14%
- Mitt Romney 9%
- John McCain 8%
- Hillary Clinton 5%
- Barack Obama 5%
Survey of registered Republican voters was conducted September 17-23.
Rasmussen Daily Tracking Poll , GOP Nomination
- Fred Thompson 26%
- Rudy Giuliani 20%
- Mitt Romney 13%
- John McCain 11%
- Mike Huckabee 6%
Daily tracking results are from survey interviews conducted over four days ending last night. Each update includes approximately 600-650 Likely Republican Primary Voters. Margin of sampling error for each is +/- 4 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.
For all the people who still want to discuss the debate tonight.
KEYES VS PAUL THE DEBUT TONIGHT!!!
Rudy Giuliani
Fred Thompson
John McCain
Mitt Romney
Newt Gingrich
General Race 4 2008 News
Hillary Clinton
On the same day that Sen. McCain ran his first two TV ads in New Hampshire (as Kavon graciously posted below), he takes to the pages of the National Review to lay out his comprehensive energy policy. It’s a lengthy article, but it should definitely be read in full. Some important points:
America’s dependency on foreign oil is a major strategic vulnerability for our nation. One element in al Qaeda’s war against us is to target the U.S. economy by driving up the price of oil in the hope that severe recession and higher inflation will follow. Osama bin Laden and other al Qaeda terrorists have spoken many times about the need to “mount … operations accordingly” in order to hit energy supply points in the Middle East and other regions to spike oil prices. Moreover, while most of the world’s known reserves are in the Persian Gulf, oil supplies are no more secure elsewhere on the globe. In Russia and Venezuela, Vladimir Putin and Hugo Chavez have rolled back democracy and utilized oil and gas as foreign policy weapons. Nigerian supplies – our fifth-largest supplier – are endangered by internal strife. Oil’s availability is uncertain and its price at the mercy of countries where our values aren’t typically shared and our interests aren’t their first priority….
National security depends on energy security, which we cannot achieve if we remain so dependent on imported oil from Middle Eastern governments who support or foment, by their own inattention and inequities, the rise of terrorists or on swaggering demagogues and would be dictators in our hemisphere. Additionally, by mid-century there will be three-and-a-half billion cars worldwide – over four times the number today. As world demand for oil soars, higher prices, severe economic volatility, and heightened international tensions follow. These unpredictable forces could seriously circumscribe our future if we let them.
As president, I won’t let that happen….
With some of the savings from cutting subsidies for industries that can stand on their own, we can establish a national challenge to improve the cost, range, size, and weight of electric batteries for automobiles. Fifty percent of cars on the road are driven 25 miles a day or less. Affordable battery-powered vehicles, that can meet average commuter needs, could help us cut oil imports in half. The reward will be earned through merit by whoever accomplishes the task, whether it comes from a laboratory in the Department of Energy, a university, a corporation, or an enterprising young inventor who works out of his family’s garage….
We have in use today, a zero-emission energy that could provide electricity for millions more homes and businesses than it currently does. Yet it has been over 25 years since a nuclear-power plant has been constructed. The barriers to nuclear energy are political not technological. We’ve let the fears of 30 years ago, and an endless political squabble over the storage of nuclear spent fuel make it virtually impossible to build a single new plant that produces a form of energy that is safe and non-polluting. If France can produce 80-percent of its electricity with nuclear power, why can’t we? Is France a more secure, advanced, and innovative country than we are? Are France’s scientists and entrepreneurs more capable than we are? I need no answer to that rhetorical question. I know my country well enough to know otherwise….
Answering great challenges is nothing new to America. It’s what we do. We built the rockets that took us to the moon – not because it was easy, but because it was hard. We’ve sent space probes into the distant reaches of the universe. We harnessed nuclear energy, mapped the human genome, created the Internet, and pioneered integrated circuits that consolidate the computing power of the Apollo spacecraft onto a barely visible silicon chip. If we can do all this, we can surely solve our oil-dependence problem, and strengthen our security.
Like so much in America these days, energy independence was a temporary fad. When gas prices climbed to over $3.50 a gallon last year, there was a vocal outcry for someone to do something. Politicians and pundits took to the airwaves to assure the public that energy independence was on the way. President Bush used much of his 2006 State of the Union to tout this goal. Lots of people decided to take public transportation, put their SUV’s in the garage, maybe even buy a Prius, but as soon as gas prices went down again, the old habits returned. Nowadays the issue of energy independence has virtually vanished from public discourse. That is until gas prices go up again, of course.
That’s one thing, among many, that I admire about John McCain. He understands that it’s one thing to talk about developing more domestic energy sources and another thing to actually get it enacted. To achieve real change, the nation as a whole must be called upon to act. As McCain says, not because it’s easy, but because it’s hard.
We are just $2000 shy of our goal of $75,000. Right now there are about 30 people here driving donations for Mitt and thousands of other people all over the country doing the same thing. We’ve raised over $1500 just today and the deadline is at 9:00 for this rally.