Movement is from the last update one week ago:
| Name | Value | Change |
| Romney | 25.9 | +2.7 |
| Pawlenty | 18.4 | +3.8 |
| Huntsman | 12.2 | -0.3 |
| Daniels | 10.9 | +0.3 |
| Cain | 6.0 | +2.2 |
| Palin | 5.9 | +0.7 |
| Bachmann | 5.5 | +2.0 |
| Perry | 3.6 | n/a |
| Christie | 3.0 | n/a |
| Gingrich | 3.0 | -1.4 |
| Paul | 2.8 | +0.2 |
| Johnson | 0.9 | +0.3 |
| Santorum | 0.8 | +0.2 |
| Moore | 0.1 | E |
| Roemer | 0.1 | E |
Only candidates who have announced an exploratory committee or a candidacy, or who have greater than a 3% chance at the nomination are included. Yellow indicates an exploratory committee; green indicates an official candidacy.
May 19th, 2011 at 2:38 pm
Daniels will be at 15, if/when he announces.
May 19th, 2011 at 2:42 pm
@1 – Or not:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/19/mitch-daniels-obamacare-similar-reforms_n_864157.html
“The candidate said he favors a universal health care system that would move away from employee-based health policies and make it mandatory for all Americans to have health insurance.”
“Daniels envisioned one scenario in which residents could certify their coverage when paying income taxes and receive a tax exemption that would cover the cost.
“We really have to have universal coverage,” Daniels said.
May 19th, 2011 at 2:44 pm
So according to Intrade, there is a 75% chance that Mitt Romney is not going to be the nominee???
Interesting…
BUY! BUY! BUY!
May 19th, 2011 at 2:49 pm
Go Santorum – up 0.2 from last time! Woo Hoo!
Okay, but seriously – it’s interesting how this is shaping up via Intrade, post-Huck and Trump announcements. I find it fascinating who Intrade stockholders think are benefiting from the absence of the two.
May 19th, 2011 at 2:51 pm
It looks like the four top-tier candidates in this “poll” all have political chief executive experience.
May 19th, 2011 at 2:56 pm
I think the investors are pretty accurate on how this thing is shaping up (although I think they are grossly overestimating Cain’s chances). If we broke it into tiers, I think it currently stands like this, in order of strength:
First tier
Romney
Pawlenty
Daniels
Huntsman
Second Tier
Paul
Bachmann
Gingrich
Cain
Third Tier
Johnson
Santorum
Roemer
Moore
IF Palin gets in, she’d probably be top of the second tier.
May 19th, 2011 at 2:56 pm
Actually, the top six do.
But one was just a CEO and the other quit
May 19th, 2011 at 2:57 pm
Matt
How is Huntsman first tier???
(1) He will not self-fund
(2) He is “McCain Lite” – a RINO on steroids
(3) He is weird
(4) He worked for Obama
(5) He runs from his faith
(6) He supported and passed Cap and Trade
May 19th, 2011 at 2:57 pm
Looks like the National Review is going to have a difficult decision on their hands. I bet they punt with Tim Pawlenty. Can’t wait to read their endorsement. “We didn’t like anybody else.”
May 19th, 2011 at 3:07 pm
Time to buy Romney, Short Huntsman and Daniels.
May 19th, 2011 at 3:14 pm
Technically, that’s tall Huntsman, short Daniels.
May 19th, 2011 at 3:18 pm
The Health Care issue is starting to turn into a “boy who cried wolf” type of thing. “Oh noes… Romney, Gingrich, Reagan and now Daniels have supported Health Care Mandates!!!”. Fans of each are either going to change candidates or shrug their shoulders.
The more Republicans found to have supported it in the past, the more people will care less.
May 19th, 2011 at 3:18 pm
Anyone who listens to the National Review to make a decision about a candidate should be taken out back and shot…
with a nerf gun.
No, but seriously… who CARES?
May 19th, 2011 at 3:26 pm
4. I PERSONALLY drove him up…yes, I purchased all the shares I could and helped drive him up that .02, lol! I own 140 shares at .08.
May 19th, 2011 at 3:28 pm
Honestly, Santorum at 8 cents is a steal….if he does ANYTHING in Aimes he will go up, even if it is just to 2 or 3%. If he gets to 4% ive made 500% on my investment.
Also like John Bolton at 1 cent a share. If he announces he will pull enough people strongly interested in foreign affairs to drive him to 10 cents a share or so, a 1000% increase on a current penny per share investment.
May 19th, 2011 at 3:32 pm
Cain WILL emerge as either the Iowan winner or will place 2nd. He will be the anti-Romney SoCon favorite in Iowa (beating out Bachmann). These guys need to be in Iowa full-time; Bachman can’t.
May 19th, 2011 at 3:34 pm
Matt (MWS),
What say you in regards to #2? Would also like to hear from DaveG about it, as well.
May 19th, 2011 at 3:47 pm
It should be
Romney
Pawlenty
Daniels
Palin
Bachmann
Cain
Huntsman
—-
Everyone else doesn’t matter.
May 19th, 2011 at 3:53 pm
At this time I have no idea if Daneils was ever serious about State Level Mandates. Did he just flirt with the idea?….did he have his people look at it?…
I have no idea at this point. But if Mitch just flirted then he will be ok in a political sense.
Every Governor has many flitations with many different subjects…but at the end of the day its what issues did the Governor fight for and implement in his years as Governor that really matters.
Rush,Mailkin,Levin,Hannity and every other talk show host, many bloggers and publications will find reasons to be against every one of these guys and gals because they flirted and went completely off the Conservative reservation…and you know what?….I’m cool with that. It’s part of the vetting process. We need to see how these guys react to the pointed questions such as “did you support state level mandate insurance?”
At this point I have no idea where Mitch is on the issue…Huffington post article not withstanding.
I do know that Pawlenty tested the idea of a mileage tax in Minnesota in 2009. Pawlenty decided that the idea wouldn’t work, it wasn’t operational and it wasn’t right for Minnesota. Maulkin hammered Pawlenty for testing the program all through 2009-10. Maulkin hates Pawlenty because of this..is this rational?…maybe for some I guess. All GOVS have ideas tested..maybe Daniels was just testing the idea then went against it?
Mitch will have plenty of time explaining himself…but he did not enact it…..so….
…”The Mandate Faction” remains NEWT & MITT.
…..I’m always open to adding another on ein there…especially if it help TPAW out in this race..
May 19th, 2011 at 4:09 pm
Smackaroony,
“Every Governor has many flitations with many different subjects…”
Don’t be so dismissive. That’s what got Sanford canned.
May 19th, 2011 at 4:21 pm
MATT “MWS”
Sanford got canned because he went waaaayyyyyy beyond the flirting.
NEWT flirted with the girl name Mandy “mandate” and even kissed her.
Mitt flirted with the girl name Mandy, kissed her, married her, Ted Kennedy was the best man at the wedding, Mitt should have divorced Mandy, and now Mandy is spending all of Mitt’s political capital on a brass ring that isn’t even shiny anymore ,and never fit the daaaaaaaannnnngggggg finger…..Mandy’s finger was always too fat!!!!
…so no………Mitch does not = Mitt……not even close.
May 19th, 2011 at 4:33 pm
Smack, so Daniels and Pawlenty flirted with the individual mandate, but didn’t inhale? Is that it? Voter are going to get tired head over this. Romney will get the edge having done something in his state. The others punted. That’s not leadership.
May 19th, 2011 at 4:39 pm
For those who haven’t, you need to read this article about MassCare. Absolutely fantastic.
http://www.patheos.com/Resources/Additional-Resources/Mitt-Romneys-Health-Care-Advantage-David-French-05-17-2011
May 19th, 2011 at 4:55 pm
22. Romney will get the edge having done something in his state.
Romney has already been given the edge:
Nothing like having your signal achievement clanged and banged about by the Law Lecturer-in-Chief.
May 19th, 2011 at 4:57 pm
24
Mitt, being the author of Romneycare, has ultimate credibility to take Obama on on the laws.
And Mitt knows what’s wrong with Obamacare, and will ruin Obama.
May 19th, 2011 at 4:59 pm
FWIW, the White House is also working to give Daniels the “Romney Special”:
May 19th, 2011 at 5:01 pm
Smackdaddy,
Well put. Mitch dated Mandy, but alas, it is Mitt who continues the loveless marriage…… What Teddy has joined, let no man tear asunder…..
May 19th, 2011 at 5:03 pm
JHO,
Mitt doesn’t even know whats wrong with Romneycare!!
Mitt won’t even tell us what parts of Romneycare he agrees with and what parts he doesn’t.
Please……I don’t want to see Romneycare vs. Obamacare in a debate.
I’d rather see Palin explain to me 3 Supreme Court decisions that she agrees with, then watch Mitt explain to the nation why his plan works…and Obamacare wouldn’t.
HOLY SMOKE!
I can’t imagine anything more painful then those two nightmare visions….
Thank God I won’t have to live through them..
..because…well..
because of the TPAW SURGE!!!
May 19th, 2011 at 5:04 pm
Where have I heard Obama’s speech before?
“With a little assist from the former governor of Massachusetts, we said that tea should no longer be a privilege in this country,” King George told laughing supporters at his first fundraiser in London. “We said that in the 13 Colonies of America, just like here in Massachusetts, you should never go broke because you can’t afford tea.”
May 19th, 2011 at 5:06 pm
25. And Mitt knows what’s wrong with Obamacare, and will ruin Obama.
That may well be. And Obama knows what’s wrong with Romneycare — but Romney won’t be able to admit its flaws. He has already managed to paint himself into the corner.
So the two will praise RomneyCare to the heavens, while Mitt tries to assure us that BamCare falls short of the ideal. Bam will claim BamCare improved on RomCare and ask why Mitt wants to withhold his wonderful plan’s wonders from the rest of his fellow Americans.
This will devolve into a laughable con game where each contestant tries to out-promise gooey chocolate handouts to everyone, entirely loosing sight of one minor flaw in the underlying plan: WE’RE FLAT BROKE AND CANNOT AFFORD MORE ENTITLEMENTS!
May 19th, 2011 at 5:07 pm
MarqueG
“Romney Special”
geeeeeze……I feel like I’m going to throw up.
The only cure for this Mandate Madness is……
Timothy James Pawlenty!!
May 19th, 2011 at 5:14 pm
Guys, Mitt doesn’t mention which parts he doesn’t like because he doesn’t want to get into specifics. He wants his campaign to be about Obama and about jobs, not the particulars of his health care plan.
And You watch… Mitt is going to SLAM Obama on economics and foreign policy!
May 19th, 2011 at 5:52 pm
It’s understandable that Smack, et. al want Romney to run an ineffective campaign by allowing others to push him on the defensive, because it’s a losing proposition. Good campaigners succeed in going on offense and focusing the debate where it can have the most impact.
May 19th, 2011 at 6:18 pm
How is Mitch Daniels going to criticize RomneyCare when he supported the same thing a few years earlier? And supported it at the federal level? That is not going to help Daniels beat Mitt.
It isn’t the fact that he supported a mandate that hurts him. It is the fact that he has no ability to differentiate himself from Mitt without looking like a complete hypocrite (“flip-flopper”). I wan’t Mitch to join this race more than ever now. I wonder how well his support amongst the establishment will hold up.
May 19th, 2011 at 7:01 pm
I think the grassroots candidates are seriously, seriously undervalued. Here’s how I’d lay the odds:
Romney 30%
Bachmann 16%
Cain 15%
Pawlenty 12%
Daniels 7%
Palin 7%
Field 6%
Huntsman 5%
Gingrich 2%
F
May 19th, 2011 at 7:19 pm
35 – I agree, which is great news for Mitt.
May 20th, 2011 at 7:27 am
I see in the wake of the Huckabee and Trump announcements nearly everyone (even Palin) is getting a bump on Intrade. Can’t help but chuckle at the fact that Gingrich is still sinking like a stone even though candidates typically get a small bounce when they announce; imagine how low he’d be trading if Huck/Trump were still in contention.