- John McCain 28% (12%)
- Mike Huckabee 20% (19%)
- Mitt Romney 19% (17%)
- Rudy Giuliani 15% (25%)
- Fred Thompson 8% (14%)
- Ron Paul 3% (3%)
- Duncan Hunter 2% (2%)
- No Opinion 2% (4%)
Second Choice
- John McCain 24%
- Mike Huckabee 18%
- Rudy Giuliani 15%
- Mitt Romney 14%
- Fred Thompson 8%
- Ron Paul 4%
- Duncan Hunter 2%
Regardless of who you may support, who do you think is the strongest leader?
- John McCain 37%
- Rudy Giuliani 25%
- Mike Huckabee 11%
- Mitt Romney 11%
- Fred Thompson 5%
Regardless of who you may support, who do you think has the best experience to be president?
- John McCain 40%
- Rudy Giuliani 20%
- Mitt Romney 12%
- Mike Huckabee 10%
- Fred Thompson 4%
Regardless of who you may support, who do you think has the best chance of getting elected president in November 2008?
- John McCain 33%
- Rudy Giuliani 16%
- Mike Huckabee 16%
- Mitt Romney 14%
- Fred Thompson 2%
Survey of 389 Republicans and Republican leaners was conducted January 9-12, 2008. The margin of error is +/- 5 percentage points. Results from the poll completed December 9, 2007 are in parentheses.
January 13th, 2008 at 9:03 pm
giuliani’s strategy seems to be playin gout well. only problem is that for it to work, his numbers were supposed to hold. this is not good for him.
January 13th, 2008 at 9:20 pm
What does it say about our country that Ron Paul and Fred Thompson, the two most Constitutional candidates, are relegated to the bottom of the polls, while John McCain and Mike Huckabee, the two most unconstitutional candidates, surge to the top?
http://www.RonPaulIsWrong.com/
January 13th, 2008 at 9:21 pm
This is a McCain vs. Huck race now. Good. Huck will trounce McCain in South Carolina.
January 13th, 2008 at 9:25 pm
WiseGuy,
If that was the case, why is McCain leading in South Carolina now? Huckabee needs to watch out for Fred Thompson who’s trying to take him down a few notches. Will he be able to fend Fred and going after McCain at the same time?
January 13th, 2008 at 9:27 pm
Just watching Face the Nation.
Romney was great.
Huckabee, on cue, ducked and weaved and didn’t answer the first question and the guy had to ask him the question again.
But I’m glad that Huck answered that question because we found Huck’s equivalent to Bush’s “Nuclear” pronunciation.
Huck said “MAN-OOO-FACTURING” like seven times and I was busting up.
January 13th, 2008 at 9:29 pm
josiah,
It goes to show that it takes one win to turn these things upside down. Paul should focus on a state like Thompson is doing and work that state hard. These polls are so out of whack with each other that there’s really nothing that one can take from them except for the fact that McCain is leading them at the moment. If Romney wins Michigan, Thompson wins SC, or anyone wins any major primary, these things get turned on their head.
January 13th, 2008 at 9:30 pm
WiseGuy,
How is Huck up by 1% over Romney (when Romney hasn’t had a significant win YET) in this national poll make it a McCain/Huck race?
You lost me there.
January 13th, 2008 at 9:31 pm
Fred will win SC.
January 13th, 2008 at 9:33 pm
6, The interesting thing is I don’t really recall Huckabee getting a boost out of Iowa. My theory on this is that Huckabee has been weathering a huge asault by the conservative media establishement and the momentum was only able to keep him from imploding, while McCain has allready been under so much attack that another attack isn’t going to hurt him that much.
January 13th, 2008 at 9:34 pm
Better phonetics on Huck’s pronunciation: “MAN-NEW-FACTURING”
Is that an accepted pronunciation that anyone knows of?
January 13th, 2008 at 9:50 pm
Knew it was going to be a shocker when I saw how far Rudy has fallen after he went AWOL on the trail…
http://www.political-buzz.com/
January 13th, 2008 at 9:56 pm
McCain is only a win or 2 away from putting this contest to bed. On the other hand, if Mitt can pull off a win in Michigan and follow it up with a win in Nevada, and maybe even in South Carolina, He would take the upper hand and blow this thing sky high. Huckabee also has a shot, but a 3rd place finish in Michigan would make it more of a long shot, because it would make it unlikely that he would win South Carolina. Fred and Rudy have no shot, and that is reflected in these results. Mitt and Huckabee both improved, but the McCain surge came almost entirely from Rudy and Fred.
January 13th, 2008 at 9:56 pm
Hello, everyone-
#9 John Mark-
Per Huck’s boost-
Huck received a tremendous boost out of Iowa, in my view:
Huck had little if any organization in NH, and had spent more time campaigning in Iowa. He was able to parlay his free-media bounce from nothing in NH to a third-place finish there. Granted, it was a distant third behind McCain and Mitt. But for a candidate who started w/ nothing-
Huck beat Rudy Giuliani – who had huge advantages in name recognition and money, and who had contested the state very aggressively w/ TV and appearances – until he withdrew in mid-December. Huck also had no natural constituency in NH – and did quite well.
Huck is also riding his Iowa bounce into a certain third-place finish in Michigan – again, a state where he has no organization and no face time – and where he will once again finish ahead of Rudy. And Fred.
And Huck has been propelled into a big-time player in SC.
None of those things would have happened without his Iowa win.
Thoughts, anyone?
January 13th, 2008 at 10:00 pm
#10 – Jeff, you are correct — it’s “you” not “ooo”. It’s this is the correct pronunciation:
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) – Cite This Source – Share This
man·u·fac·ture /?man-yuh-fak-cher/ Pronunciation Key – Show Spelled Pronunciation[man-yuh-fak-cher] Pronunciation Key – Show IPA Pronunciation noun, verb, -tured, -tur·ing.
–noun 1. the making of goods or wares by manual labor or by machinery, esp. on a large scale: the manufacture of television sets.
January 13th, 2008 at 10:00 pm
McCain can wrap this whole thing up in Michigan. If he wins Michigan, then he will keep his leads in South Carolina and Florida and probably have Super Tuesday in the bag after he wins all of those. If Romney wins Michigan, Huckabee will win South Carolina and then it will be wide open again.
January 13th, 2008 at 10:15 pm
I think you guys are giving way too much credit to Michigan. If romney wins it it wont hurt McCain much in SC. I mean he won it in 2000 and it didnt help him there, so why would it hurt him much?
January 13th, 2008 at 10:22 pm
13, Maybe you’re right. But Rudy was allready colapsing in New Hampshire. And now after New Hampshire Huckabee took a dive in South Carolina. Maybe he did get a boost, but it seems it was a short lived one.
January 13th, 2008 at 10:26 pm
Absolutely not Jeff. Just shows you how little Huckabee knows about the business world generally. But its better than we he says wudn’t for wasn’t.
January 13th, 2008 at 10:44 pm
BrettS,
It doesn’t necessarily hurt him, but I think some momentum and steam would be lost. Actually the MSM loves McCain. They would spin the loss for McCain(if he looses) as if it was some how good. So McCain wouldn’t be probably hurt that much. Unless Mitt wins Nevada and Michigan then i think momentum swings to Mitt.
January 13th, 2008 at 11:06 pm
Well the only problem is that Nevada will almost be moot if Mitt wins it but McCain wins South Carolina because SC will receive so much more press. That being said, winning Michigan and Nevada will definitely keep Mitt in the game and keep him alive past Huck, Fred and maybe even Rudy.
January 13th, 2008 at 11:11 pm
BrettS,
Thats the crazy thing. Nevada has MORE delegates than South Carolina yet it gets more media attention. Also, take into account: if Mitt wins Nevada, Michigan, and a strong second in South Carolina, I have a feeling Mitt will be getting some serious momentum. Then it comes down to Mitt and McCain in Flordia. But then throw Rudy in that and its a mess all over again.
January 13th, 2008 at 11:44 pm
Make no mistake about it, Mitt will win Nevada with no problem whatsoever. I’m not sure, but I think he’ll win Michigan also.
January 13th, 2008 at 11:51 pm
22
I hope you are right
January 14th, 2008 at 8:45 am
Jeff #10 and Beth #14: The phonetics of American English is undergoing a shift that is eliminating the “you” sound behind alveolar consonants — the sounds created by placing the tip of the tongue against the ridge of gums behind your front teeth: n, l, t, d, s, z. Tradition has dictated the use of the “you” sound in many situations, and these are disappearing because of a generalization turning them into an “oo” sound. If you listen to how people talk, you’ll notice a shift in American English away from traditional “you”-sound pronunciation:
“manufacturing” — man-you-facturing to man-oo-facturing
“news” — n-you-z to n-oo-z
“nuclear” — n-you-clee-er (despite Dubya) to n-oo-clee-er
“Tuesday” — t-you-zday to two-zday
“dew” — dyou to doo
“in lieu of” — lyou to loo, etc.
In many places, traditional pronunciation has never called for the “you” sound for what is frequently written as “u,” such as noose, lose, doo-doo, too, and so on.
What bothers me more is the disappearance of the last vestiges of grammatical case in English: the distinction between the subjective and objective pronouns:
I vs. me
he vs. him
she vs. her
we vs. us
they vs. them
who vs. whom
People have increasingly been using the subject case (the case used for the subject of a clause) after a conjunction in places where it would traditionally be the object case (after a preposition or as the object or direct object of a verb). Without the conjunction, people get it right, but the conjunction gets them mixed up:
“for me” vs. “for you and I” (traditionally: “for you and me”)
“Jack gave them a book” vs. (increasingly likely) “Jack gave Jane and they a book”
Always consult a linguist when you find yourselves in need of useless, trivial information.
January 14th, 2008 at 8:49 am
object case (after a preposition or as the *object or direct object* of a verb)
*indirect or direct object*