- Mike Huckabee 33% (23%)
- John McCain 26% (33%)
- Fred Thompson 21% (13%)
- Mitt Romney 9% (20%)
- Rudy Giuliani 3% (4%)
- Ron Paul 2% (1%)
- Duncan Hunter 1% (1%)
- Alan Keyes 1% (2%)
- Undecided 4% (3%)
Among Republicans (81% of the sample) likely to vote in the GOP primary, Huckabee leads with 37 percent of the vote. McCain and Thompson are tied for second, each with 22 percent.
Among independents (19% of the sample) expected to vote in Saturday’s primary, McCain has a 48-19% lead over Huckabee.
Survey of 600 likely Republican primary voters (487 Republicans and 113 independent voters) was conducted January 17-18. The margin of error is ± 4 percentage points. Results from the poll conducted January 15-16 are in parentheses.
The group behind the “Confederate Flag” ad that attacks Governor Mitt Romney and Senator John McCain is called Americans for the Preservation of American Culture, or APAC. The group is headed by a man named Ron Wilson, who has an interesting history.
According to the Washington Times:
Ron Wilson, a former national commander of the Sons of Confederate Veterans and a South Carolinian who was involved in raising money for the ads, said they will be run through Saturday’s primary on every radio station in the state that carries the radio shows of Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity or Bill O’Reilly.
He wouldn’t say how big the ad buy was, only that he has been told the commercials will reach 60 percent to 65 percent of all Republican primary voters.
Mr. Wilson is a former member of the Council of Conservative Citizens.
The CofCC has been tied to movements such as Stormfront and the Ku Klux Klan. According to the Washington Post:
The Council of Conservative Citizens, an organization built by supporters of the segregationist White Citizens Councils, the John Birch Society and activists in the presidential campaigns of then-Alabama Gov. George C. Wallace, has developed strong political ties to the Republican Party in the South as well as to the fading conservative wing of the southern Democratic Party.
The group’s strong ties to the remnants of the now-defunct White Citizens Councils, a powerful force in Mississippi and other Deep South states in the 1950s and 1960s, gave it an organizational base as well as connections to small-town establishments, such as Rotary clubs. The group soon became part of the political culture – and both parties.
Ron Wilson’s ties:
R.G. “Ron” Wilson was for many years a regular columnist for the “Citizen Informer”, the publication of the Council of Conservative Citizens. As a columnist here he was able to spread his own sort of propaganda. In Volume 21, Spring 1990 Wilson saw something sinister in the collapse of the Berlin Wall. Wilson wrote a column praising Joe McCarthy in Volume 22, Winter 1991 For the Spring 1991 issue Wilson wrote a column on Martin Dies and his activities with the House Committee on Un-American activities. In 1992 Wilson was writing about a conspiracy involving the Council on Foreign Relations. Wilson was active in the Council of Conservative Citizens for a number of years.
I would strongly encourage Governor Huckabee to distance himself from these ads.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wGf87FDN9L0&eurl[/youtube]
Unfortunately prank calling is something most kids today will never really appreciate, thanks to caller ID.
SurveyUSA South Carolina GOP Primary
- John McCain 31% (29%)
- Mike Huckabee 27% (26%)
- Mitt Romney 17% (17%)
- Fred Thompson 16% (17%)
- Ron Paul 5% (5%)
- Rudy Giuliani 2% (3%)
699 adults were determined by SurveyUSA to be likely to vote in the 01/19/08 Republican Primary. Survey was conducted between 1/16 and 1/17 and has a margin of error of +/- 3.8%.
When the presidential race hits South Carolina. You say one thing, and bam… Now you’re that guy:
Now Running on South Carolina Radio Stations:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kggoIyEijME[/youtube]
The funny thing is, I actually agree with Huckabee on the fact that it’s a state issue, but I wish he would’ve distanced himself from the actual flag, while saying that it’s the right of the state to decide on this matter, which Thompson did.
If you want to understand what I’m talking about, go read some of the ignorant comments here.
Dr. Carolyn Gerster:
“John McCain is the most qualified candidate and has a consistent and principled pro-life record,” said Dr. Gerster. “He has spent his career standing up for human rights and he will continue to do so as president. John McCain will nominate judges who understand the sanctity of human life, and firmly believes that courts should not be legislating from the bench. John McCain has the conviction, strengths, and experience to serve as commander in chief from day one and that is why he has my vote.”
Ambinder, again.
Steve Mitchell is the Michigan-based pollster that accurately polled Romney’s margin of victory this past Tuesday. Take that for what it’s worth.
Mitchell Interactive South Carolina GOP Primary
- John McCain 30%
- Mike Huckabee 22%
- Mitt Romney 18%
- Fred Thompson 13%
- Rudy Giuliani 5%
- Ron Paul 4%
A sample of 897 likely Republican voters with a margin of error of +/- 3.3%. Survey conducted 1/16 and 1/17.
- Mike Huckabee 26% (33%)
- John McCain 26% (21%)
- Mitt Romney 13% (14%)
- Fred Thompson 13% (5%)
- Rudy Giuliani 5% (8%)
- Ron Paul 5% (5%)
Survey of likely voters in the South Carolina Republican Primary was conducted January 17, 2008. Results from the poll conducted January 7, 2008 are in parentheses.
Check out an innovative new independent fundraising effort “Drive2Five” on behalf of Hizzoner spearheaded by Flap at Flap’s Dental Blog.
I’ve got word that Erik at Redstate is correct. Although the press has not reported it, Fred Thompson has enough cash on hand, and has raised more than enough this quarter to comfortably be able to compete on February 5, regardless of any outcome in South Carolina.
That doesn’t mean that he will or won’t, but if he did decide to get out after South Carolina (which is hypothetical), an endorsement is not likely until the nominee is clear.
P.S. I’m not able to read comments right now, but I’ll be around later to check them out.
From NumbersUSA press release:
Among S.C. Poll Leaders, Thompson Best Overall On Immigration
(January 18) The day before South Carolina’s Republican Primary, the Rasmussen Poll of the state shows the frontrunners as McCain (24%), Huckabee (24%), Romney (18%) and Thompson (16%). Of the four, according to NumbersUSA President Roy Beck’s Presidential Grid that rates each candidate in 16 immigration categories, Fred Thompson scores the highest. And Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) scores the lowest overall. The ratings are based on how well a candidate’s immigration stances would protect American workers, taxpayers, communities, infrastructure, individual freedom and the environment. (NumbersUSA does not endorse candidates.)
By Paul West
Baltimore Sun
COLUMBIA, S.C. — On the eve of Saturday’s Republican primary in South Carolina, there are signs that Mike Huckabee could be overtaking John McCain, who had been favored to win the first southern test of the ’08 campaign.
New polling over the last two days shows McCain and Huckabee statistically tied. At least one unreleased poll had Huckabee up by four points, while a Mason-Dixon poll for MSNBC-McClatchy had McCain’s lead down to two points.
After his New Hampshire victory on Jan. 8, McCain grabbed the lead in opinion surveys in South Carolina, where he is hoping for redemption in the state that doomed his first try for the presidency, eight years ago. A defeat tomorrow could be similarly devastating.
They even have this to say about Senator Thompson:
A similar down-home pitch by Fred Thompson, from neighboring Tennessee, has had much more limited success. The former senator is running well behind Huckabee and McCain, polls show. He appears likely to join other candidates, going back to John Connally of Texas in 1980, for whom South Carolina was the end of the trail.
And the weather might play a role:
One wild card that could influence the outcome on Saturday: Forecasts call for bad weather statewide, and especially in the “upstate” portions of the Piedmont plateau, where social and religious conservatives are concentrated. That could work to McCain’s advantage, his supporters say.
But the conditions may have the opposite effect: by magnifying Huckabee’s edge among Christian voters, who seem to be the ones who are the most motivated to turn out on Saturday.
A friend, David Schmidt from California writes:
It has been brought to my attention that the first line of this post needs fact-checking. We have asked the author, David Schmidt, to provide references for this claim.
Frm. Gov. Mitt Romney has stated many times that he wants to take his Massachusetts RomneyCare health plan national.
“Enrollment in the state’s new subsidized health plan is growing so quickly that the state could face a funding gap as large as $147 million by the end of the fiscal year, according to a state projection.”
SOURCE: http://BOSTON.com/news/local/articles/2007/11/18/success_could_put_health_plan_in_the_red/
Doesn’t this sound like a wonderful problem? The government subsidized health care is so popular that it is expanding the state’s budget. Of course, this could never happen if we implemented this on a national level, could it?
“Romney’s vaunted healthcare plan also disappoints. It forces individuals to purchase medical coverage and slaps the non-compliant with “tax penalties,” as a state-government radio ad described them last November. These charges were $219 in 2007, equal to the personal exemption on Massachusetts’ state tax. However, this year’s formula could crank this figure up to $912. Businesses with at least 11 workers either must offer health insurance or face annual fines of $295-per-uninsured employee. This is consistent with Romney’s statement at a January 5 GOP presidential debate: “I like mandates.”
This program is run not by the free market, but by the Commonwealth Health Insurance Connector, a Romney-created government bureaucracy. For 2007, reports the Pacific Research Institute’s Sally Pipes, RomneyCare is expected to have cost taxpayers some $619 million. That’s $147 million and 31 percent above original projections.
Romney blames all this on tinkering Democratic state legislators.
“I don’t know what’s going to happen down the road as the Democrats get their hands on it,” Romney told the National Review Institute. “I was a little concerned at the signing ceremony when Ted Kennedy showed up.”
SOURCE: http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=12568
Please wakeup my fellow fiscons up! While Romney’s plan may sound nice, it will only take a year or two before the government is running the whole thing. This is how the history of big government has gone. A good plan is implemented by government…government does not stick to the plan and it degrades into government taking the whole thing over.
Why is nobody talking about this?
Instead we like to ponder questions such as Romney whether is really pro-life when he says he is or whether Huckabee will really not raise taxes when he pledged not to. We are missing the boat and if we do not wake up soon and start asking the right questions, the party of the right will continue to act like the party of the left.
Edited at 4:45 CST
- John McCain 53% (58%)
- Hillary Clinton 40% (35%)
- John McCain 53% (56%)
- Barack Obama 39% (36%)
- Hillary Clinton 47% (39%)
- Mike Huckabee 46% (53%)
- Mike Huckabee 46% (50%)
- Barack Obama 44% (41%)
- Hillary Clinton 47% (43%)
- Mitt Romney 44% (49%)
- Barack Obama 45% (43%)
- Mitt Romney 43% (44%)
- Hillary Clinton 48% (39%)
- Rudy Giuliani 42% (51%)
- Rudy Giuliani 45% (52%)
- Barack Obama 43% (38%)
Survey of 512 registered voters was conducted January 16-17, 2008. The margin of error is +/- 4.4 percentage points. Results from the poll conducted December 13-15, 2007 are in parentheses. In the 2004 election, President Bush defeated Senator Kerry in Kansas, 62-37%.
- John McCain 58% (50%)
- Hillary Clinton 37% (43%)
- John McCain 63% (54%)
- Barack Obama 29% (36%)
- Mike Huckabee 55% (49%)
- Hillary Clinton 40% (44%)
- Mike Huckabee 59% (52%)
- Barack Obama 32% (37%)
- Mitt Romney 52% (46%)
- Hillary Clinton 42% (45%)
- Mitt Romney 56% (48%)
- Barack Obama 34% (39%)
- Rudy Giuliani 50% (49%)
- Hillary Clinton 42% (42%)
- Rudy Giuliani 55% (52%)
- Barack Obama 34% (36%)
Survey of 537 registered voters was conducted January 16-17, 2008. The margin of error is +/- 4.3 percentage points. Results from the poll conducted December 13-15, 2007 are in parentheses. In the 2004 election, President Bush defeated Senator Kerry in Alabama, 63-37%.
- John McCain 27% (25%)
- Mike Huckabee 20% (18%)
- Mitt Romney 15% (17%)
- Fred Thompson 11% (9%)
- Ron Paul 4% (5%)
- Rudy Giuliani 3% (5%)
- Duncan Hunter 1% (1%)
- Undecided 19% (19%)
Survey of 500 likely South Carolina Republican primary voters was conducted January 16-17 (after the Michigan primary). The margin of error is +/- 4 percentage points. Results from the poll conducted January 9 are in parentheses.
A post at Real Clear Politics makes some interesting comments:
Why is it that most primary candidates refuse to run sustained, intense negative campaigns? The answer is that everybody is basically on the same side. An attacking candidate has to be careful about his opponent’s core supporters. He runs the risk of alienating them – and they might ultimately refuse to support him after their guy drops out of the race. Romney might find himself in that situation. His attacks on McCain and Huckabee have been as sustained and intense as any this cycle. And there is evidence that this has damaged him with the Huck and Mac factions.
The Pew poll found that Romney’s net favorable rating among these voters is not very strong: just +7% among McCain voters, and a whopping -9% among Huckabee voters. Of course, the sample sizes informing these statistics are small – but they are large enough to validate this modest conclusion: Romney is relatively weak among Huckabee and McCain supporters. For comparative purposes: McCain is +30% among Huckabee supporters; Huckabee is +15% among McCain supporters; Giuliani is an eye-popping +69% among McCain supporters, and +33% among Huckabee supporters. [A problem Romney will confront if he wins the GOP nomination: he has a net -12% favorable rating among the general electorate. I'd wager this is also a consequence of the negative tenor of his campaign in recent months.]
This could create problems for Romney in Florida, depending on how things turn out in South Carolina. Following Pew, it does not seem that Romney is the second choice of a plurality of Huckabee voters or McCain voters. The situation in Florida might be different than what Pew finds on the national level, but I doubt it significantly so. My sense is that if Floridians bolt Huckabee after he loses South Carolina – a plurality will go to McCain, not Romney. Similarly, if they bolt McCain – a plurality will go to Giuliani, not Romney. Generally, Pew and other pollsters have found Romney in third or fourth place when it comes to second choices. Pew also finds that 20% of Republicans will never vote for Romney, making him more “unacceptable” than McCain or Giuliani.
The author goes on to say that Mitt could use a narrow Huck victory in South Carolina to propel him to the nomination. Maybe, but as we have seen so far, no one can predict anything in this election season.
Mitt would have ALOT of bridge building to do if he were to get the nomination. He has alienated 1/2 the GOP party.
It is also my opinion that America will not elect Mitt over any Democrat candidate.
Rasmussen Reports National Republican Primary Daily Tracking Poll
- Huckabee – 22% (23)
- McCain – 21% (20)
- Romney – 19% (18)
- Thompson – 12% (12)
- Giuliani – 10% (11)
This thing is getting more tight than ever before.
The 3 legs of the party are visible -
And no one seems to be willing to move.
Zogby/Reuters/C-SPAN Republican South Carolina Primary
- McCain – 29% (29)
- Huckabee – 22% (22)
- Romney – 15% (12)
- Thompson – 12% (13)
- Paul – 4% (5)
- Giuliani – 2% (5)
- Hunter – 1% (1)
- Undecided – 9% (10)
Zogby notes: “[O]ne-day results from yesterday’s portion of the three-day tracking poll show Huckabee inching up on McCain and Romney making solid gains in the wake of his Michigan victory Tuesday. In the single day of polling on Thursday alone, Romney hit 19%, while McCain’s lead over Huckabee stood at only 3.2%. If Romney continues to gain after Michigan it will hurt McCain.”
From the AR Democrat:
Volunteers making telephone calls for John McCain last weekend noticed something odd: Four people contacted said in remarkably similar language that they opposed McCain for president because of his 1980 divorce from his first wife, Carol, who raised the couple’s three children while McCain was a prisoner of war in Vietnam.
This week, a group called Common Sense Issues is making what it says will be 1 million automated calls to households in South Carolina, telling voters, according to one of the calls, that McCain “has voted to use unborn babies in medical research.”
Common Sense Issues is a nonprofit group “dedicated to educating and informing our fellow citizens in an in-depth manner about public policy issues,” according to its Web site. Its executive director, Patrick Davis of Colorado Springs, Colo., is a veteran Republican political operative.
I’m going to wait until after South Carolina I get home this evening before I really comment on this group. However, I was suprised to find out that a large portion of the funding for these calls came from someone that I have met on a couple of occasions. It’s being funded by someone from the same county that I live in and have met him on more than one occasion. This is a huge Thompson area, so I’m sure this isn’t go to go over well with the local GOP. I’ve got more to say about this at a later date, but for now, all I will say is that this is ridiculous. I’m not a McCain supporter, but this goes well beyond the bounds of what I am comfortable with.
Mason Dixon Nevada, 1/14-16/08
- Romney 34%
- McCain 19%
- Huckabee 13%
- Thompson 8%
- Paul 7%
- Giuliani 6%
The poll of 500 likely caucus-goers for each party was conducted by Mason-Dixon Polling & Research Inc. from Monday through Wednesday and carries a margin of error of plus or minus 4.5 percentage points.
From the McCain Campaign:
We feel that we are incredibly well positioned. In South Carolina, we think that the military vote is very important to put us over the top. We roll into Florida with the momentum…John McCain has phenomenal name ID as does Rudy Giuliani but John McCain will have the momentum because he will have won South Carolina and I think that’s very tough to stop. We feel our path to victory is very solid.”
From veteran political journalist of The State in SC, Lee Bandy:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lO07yQpQpoM[/youtube]
Is there enough momentum out of South Carolina to give the victor the spoils? My guess is probably not. What’s yours?
- John McCain 26%
- Rudy Giuliani 22%
- Mike Huckabee 17%
- Mitt Romney 16%
- Fred Thompson 7%
- Ron Paul 5%
- Other 2%
- Undecided 5%
Survey of 500 likely Republican primary voters was conducted January 14-16. The margin of error is +/- 4.5 percentage points.
John McCain
Mike Huckabee
Mitt Romney
Rudy Giuliani
Fred Thompson
General Race 4 2008 News
Hillary Clinton
Barack Obama
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Author, journalist, and one of the famous Limbaugh brothers, endorses Fred Thompson for President. From his website:
Commentators are citing the unpredictability of the Republican primary contests as proof that Reagan conservatism is dead when precisely the opposite conclusion is warranted.
The main reason the conventional wisdom is being shattered in the primaries is that conservative voters, so far, have not been persuaded there is an electable, reliable conservative in the race.
But as I’ve stated before, I believe Fred Thompson is a reliable, consistent conservative. There are others in the field I could support, but not without some reservations. The more I learn about Fred and observe him in action, the more convinced I become that he’s the right choice.
I was among those who urged Fred to step up and prove to the people he wanted the job. Regardless of whether Fred actually had “fire in his belly,” the unmistakable perception out there was that he did not, so I encouraged him to add a little spring to his step.
But I’ve also appreciated Fred’s unwillingness to be somebody he is not. He will not respond like a puppet when a debate moderator tells him to raise his hand to signify a childishly simplistic approval or disapproval of a certain policy. He will not be goaded by interviewers into saying things he doesn’t feel comfortable saying. He won’t divide us with class envy or pretend we can be friends with rogue regimes or terrorists. He does not promise a chicken in every pot or pander to liberals on global warming.
He will not otherwise tailor his positions to suit the demands of particular constituencies. For example, he has the courage to preach that Social Security is in trouble, but unlike most others, he doesn’t surrender to the oppressive populist seduction to urge government fixes for it or for health care. Instead, he courageously tells us — if we’ll listen — that the answers lie in greater market forces. (Listen up, conservatives.)
Fred does not run from his record — more to the point, he doesn’t need to. He shoots straight without the constant self-serving reminders that he does, as in telling us he’s driving the “Straight Talk Express.”
More importantly, Fred is right on the issues, and there’s little doubt his positions are firm. Research his stances; read his position papers. You’ll find he’s very strong in all areas important to mainstream conservatives, including national defense, taxes, spending, life, immigration, federalism, appointing originalist judges, health care and education.
I’m not drooling over Fred or saying his record is flawless, but I am saying he’s the real deal, and it’s a bit disappointing that more haven’t taken a closer look.
I think this is due partly to his laid-back personality and partly to his timing. He peaked about the time he was contemplating entering the race but not acting on it. By the time he jumped in, it was anticlimactic, and he still hasn’t recovered from that reversal.
There has also been a negative momentum hovering over his already-stalled campaign, acting as a psychological barrier to his catching fire among conservative voters.
There is simply too much herd mentality among us about electability. We tell ourselves a candidate is not inspiring, then pretty soon we’re convinced he’s unelectable, and, voila, he almost becomes so. Yet, at that very moment, he’s proving to us that he is quite presidential, quite electable and quite motivated for the job — if we can only shed our predispositions against his “electability.” Since electability is often a matter of collective perception, it can turn on a dime, as with the reversal of the respective fortunes of screaming Howard Dean and somniferous John Kerry in 2004.
This primary season, relatively speaking, has just begun. But Fred is now up against the wall. How can we expect him to have done much better than he has to date with everyone prattling on about the overwhelming odds against him? The “experts” continue to be wrong at almost every turn, so why can’t they be wrong about Fred, too? It’s time to quit empowering them by following their dictatorial doom-prophecies. It’s encouraging that John Zogby’s latest South Carolina poll shows that while levels of support for McCain and Huckabee “have remained static,” Fred is starting to move up.
Supporters have asked Fred to step up, and he has — he has shone brilliantly in the last month, setting himself head and shoulders above the pack in many cases. Now it’s time for conservative voters to step up and quit placing artificial limitations on Fred, and on themselves.
Fred has answered the conservatives’ call. Shouldn’t we answer his?
