The much anticipated…
Des Moines Register Republican Iowa Caucus
- Romney – 23%
- Bachmann – 22%
- Cain – 10%
- Gingrich – 7%
- Paul – 7%
- Pawlenty – 6%
- Santorum – 4%
- Huntsman – 2%
Survey of 400 likely caucus-goers was done June 19-22 and has a margin of error of +/-4.9%.
June 25th, 2011 at 8:29 pm
From the DMR article:
“If I were the Pawlenty camp, I would be enormously concerned about this poll,” said Jennifer Duffy of the nonpartisan Cook Political Report.
June 25th, 2011 at 8:30 pm
Holy Smoke!
June 25th, 2011 at 8:31 pm
And now we know why Pawlenty leaked an internal poll with him in the double digits.
June 25th, 2011 at 8:32 pm
Romney up in Iowa? But there’s no movie about him there
June 25th, 2011 at 8:33 pm
So Pawlenty is within the margin of error for third place. And so are the others Cain and below.
June 25th, 2011 at 8:35 pm
This would seem to confirm what we’ve noticed since the first debate: Bachman is Romney’s primary challenger, and neither Newt nor T-Paw likely have much steam to continue past Ames / Labor Day.
There is no reason Romney can’t beat Bachman…he needs to step it up in IA.
June 25th, 2011 at 8:36 pm
Let’s put this DMR poll of June 2011 into perspective.
Take a look a gander at this:
DMR IOWA POLL
October 01-03, 2007
6 weeks after the Ames Straw Poll was held.
Mitt Romney 29%
Thompson 18%
Huckabee 12%
Giuliani 11%
McCain 7%
Paul 4%
6 Weeks after Huck came in 2nd place at the AMES Straw POLL, Huck started to gain traction in Iowa according to the DMR poll, the Gold Standard of Iowa polls.
The first time Huck was in 2nd place by himself in any Iowa poll, was at the end of October 2007.
The first time Huck was in 1st place by himself in any Iowa Poll, was at the end of November 2007.
Again, I’m not saying that TPAW is exactly like Huckabee…..but his strategy is the same. First, to exceed expectations at AMES, which TPAW will need a first place finish…second place will not do it for TPAW. Second, to take his strong finish at AMES and start building support among the EVANS in Iowa, with his support being evident around October-November.
TPAW is following the same path….
June 25th, 2011 at 8:37 pm
He’s ahead there, Matthew, without even trying. When he kicks in in Iowa, I look for his numbers to go up.
June 25th, 2011 at 8:39 pm
Romney would have no problem ceding Iowa to Bachmann. Aside from him winning outright, that would be the best scenario for him since she can’t win the nomination.
Then he’d just have to worry about someone catching fire from S. Carolina.
June 25th, 2011 at 8:40 pm
WOAH BACHMANN?!?!?!?!? WOW!!!
Awesome. Let her be the anti-Mitt!
June 25th, 2011 at 8:41 pm
Wait, no Gary Johnson?
June 25th, 2011 at 8:42 pm
Can it be sugar-coated somehow that T-Paw polls below Gingrich? I’m for Romney, but like T-Paw and wish him well. Gingrich? What does the guy have to do to convince voters that he’s an unbelievably poor candidate? What does T-Paw have to do to gain a little traction?
Crazy days.
June 25th, 2011 at 8:44 pm
I wonder how much Bachmann being from Iowa originally helps her numbers.
June 25th, 2011 at 8:46 pm
Romney may run the table on these primaries just the way John Kerry did in 2004.
For all the carping about how the next-in-line theory of GOP presidential primaries is a bunch of crap, it sure seems to be holding true yet again.
June 25th, 2011 at 8:46 pm
A note for you all to consider:
Mitt got 26% of the vote in the caucus in 2008. Here he has 23%.
But 17% are undecided in this POLL.
So Mitt has actually IMPROVED his standing since 2008. Things can and will change, but we know that Romneycare has not killed him.
June 25th, 2011 at 8:47 pm
14. How do we know how much of Romney’s polling numbers is due to next-in-line mentality vs. other factors?
June 25th, 2011 at 8:49 pm
“Romney may run the table on these primaries just the way John Kerry did in 2004.”
Has it happened on our side before?
June 25th, 2011 at 8:51 pm
Ron Paul’s people have figured out how to rig and win straw polls. They can’t win the real deal, but they can do straw. Even with new rules, I wouldn’t bet against them in Ames. They love the subversion of it all too much, and it’s the only trick in the playbook. Whoever comes in second will have more attention, but Paul’s showing will rub off a little of the gloss.
The harder Romney plays in Iowa, the more he will stir up the anti-Mitt Evangelicals. The lower their turnout, the better his numbers,the more he campaigns there, the better their numbers. It cancels out Iowa’s significance for him, and no one will blame him. Huck’s eventual endorsement is going to be a Ginormous deal here. If he is going to endorse Bachmann, he needs to hold off while she’s going well. If he’s going to endorse T-Paw, he’d better get to it before it’s too late.
June 25th, 2011 at 8:54 pm
#17 – yes, but you’d have to go back to Reagan’s challenge against Ford for the last time it happened, I think.
June 25th, 2011 at 8:59 pm
I have to admit, I am surprised at how poorly Pawlenty is doing in the polls. I truly believed that the GOP primary was going to be between Romney and Pawlenty. Those two were the ones who took the preparation for the campaign the most seriously.
June 25th, 2011 at 9:01 pm
“but Paul’s showing will rub off a little of the gloss. ”
I detest that…if only Paul’s people would stop screwing with the process, these polls actually would have meaning.
=====
“The harder Romney plays in Iowa, the more he will stir up the anti-Mitt Evangelicals.”
I don’t think that segment is as big as some people think it is. Even if rural evangelicals were not anti-mitt, they were going to be drawn to one of their own.
Bachman has some claim to rural, but she isn’t the country-fried baptist-preacher type that Huckabee was.
June 25th, 2011 at 9:08 pm
“yes, but you’d have to go back to Reagan’s challenge against Ford for the last time it happened, I think.”
Nope. Reagan won SC, Ford won the other two “firsts”
IF Romney can sweep them, it would be the first time, I believe.
June 25th, 2011 at 9:08 pm
The Des Moines Register polls are so good, they only need 400 respondents?!??!!?
June 25th, 2011 at 9:09 pm
Smack,
I would say that you and the rest of the Pawlenty team have your work cut out for you. To make matters worse, the Paul people are all set to crash the party at Ames, which cheapens the results for all the contestants.
So even if Pawlenty comes in second (or even first for that matter) to a strong Paul, people are going to say, “If Paul can do so well, Ames obviously doesn’t mean much.”
I wish you guys luck. You’re going to need it.
June 25th, 2011 at 9:16 pm
24
But the sentiment “If Paul can do so well, Ames obviously doesn’t mean much.” could go both ways, if you think about it, when it comes to coverage of TPaw’s loss at Ames.
June 25th, 2011 at 9:19 pm
I would like to point you all to the final DMR poll of 2007, which had a survey size of 800 respondents.
http://race42012.com/2007/12/31/poll-watch-des-moines-register-gop-iowa-caucus-2/#comments
Today’s only has 400 respondents. The margin of error in today’s DMR poll is 5%. The margin of error in 2007 was 3.5%
June 25th, 2011 at 9:20 pm
Matthew K, you are correct, sir… I was just thinking Iowa and New Hampshire and neglected to add SC. and since the IA-NH-SC trio has only been significant since the 70s, we don’t have to go any further back to test the theory. Kudos.
June 25th, 2011 at 9:21 pm
Oh, So that is what the TPAW surge, that I’ve been reading about for the last several weeks, looks like. Outstanding!
June 25th, 2011 at 9:21 pm
Wow. Very, very bad news for the Pawlenty folks. This is a pathetic showing for a candidate camping out in the state and for the only campaign running ads there.
Has anybody ever won the Iowa straw poll without even trying? As I understand it, Romney is going to London to fundraise and will skip the straw poll. Is is possible to win it with no effort? I understand it to be a test of organization and financing so I would think the answer is no.
June 25th, 2011 at 9:31 pm
I was thinking this would tempt Huckabee to get back in the race, but then I remember Huck is worse at fundraising than T-Poor.
If Bachmann can hang in there without imploding until the Iowa causus, it would seem the camapaign for T-Paw is over…something I never envisioned.
If Perry and/or Palin gets in, I guess T-Paw should start looking for a law firm to join…
June 25th, 2011 at 9:36 pm
My concern with Bachman is the palin thing: pick good fruit before its ripe, and the only thing you can do is throw it out.
June 25th, 2011 at 9:45 pm
MassCon,
Thanks for the link to the old poll. It was a nice little jaunt down memory lane!
June 25th, 2011 at 9:46 pm
MassCon,
As long as you’re perusing old threads, you should take stock in how triumphalist many Rombots became by the Fall of ’07.
There are lessons to be learned…….
June 25th, 2011 at 9:46 pm
This clearly is not a large sample. I suspect this may be because there are more announcements to go. There is nothing in this that would stop Palin from entering. There is 17% undecided. Also I do believe that governors have institutional advantages over congressmen. Palin can talk about cutting spending in good and bad times, passing major ethics reform, and shepherding a major pipeline through with Canada and the state legislature.
Bachmann can talk about she voted for this and that. Bachmann has been a bomb thrower all her career and has never shown the ability to put coalitions together to get things done.
Mitt shows that he will span the globe to hit up fatcats for donations. I just don’t see this selling to working class people.
June 25th, 2011 at 9:47 pm
7.
I didn’t realize Huck had camped out in Iowa 2 years before the straw poll. I thought his was a sudden, unprecedented, meteoric rise from obscurity.
June 25th, 2011 at 9:49 pm
33. Matt “MWS”,
I’ve noticed this time around we tend to preface our comments with “Things could change…” or “It’s still early…” or “This far out…”
June 25th, 2011 at 9:54 pm
“Bachmann has been a bomb thrower all her career and has never shown the ability to put coalitions together”
…you just described SARAH! as the general voting population has known her as a national figure.
Sarah, assuming she doesn’t get bogged down with jury duty, has still waited far too long.
June 25th, 2011 at 10:04 pm
I think the biggest story of this poll (bigger than Pawlenty’s poor showing) is how little love there is for Mitt in Iowa. In poll after poll voters there have effectively said, “Anyone but Mitt.” It doesn’t matter how many names are included or excluded. It doesn’t matter how big or small the other options. 3/4 or more of the Iowa GOP seem to be saying “Not Mitt” with extraordinary consistency.
Iowa and New Hampshire have never had the same winner in a non-incumbent year. I don’t expect this cycle to be any different.
June 25th, 2011 at 10:06 pm
hamaca,
#36. The sane ones are, but it’s unclear if they hold enough shares to control Romney, Inc.
June 25th, 2011 at 10:06 pm
I wonder if running for President would get you out of jury duty.
June 25th, 2011 at 10:10 pm
35:
Those statements are not mutually exclusive. They’re both pretty accurate too (except for “unprecedented”).
June 25th, 2011 at 10:13 pm
#26 Massachusetts Conservative,
Interesting link. A few thoughts:
1. The poll pretty much told the story of what would happen although many doubted Huckabee would actually pull it off.
2. Many of you have done this here before.
3. Sad to read posts from IllinoisGuy. I have been here long enough to have known him and know today’s poll would’ve made him quite happy.
June 25th, 2011 at 10:13 pm
For all the carping about how the next-in-line theory of GOP presidential primaries is a bunch of crap, it sure seems to be holding true yet again.
What do you mean, yet again?
How was George W. Bush the next in line? He’d never run before! Forbes, if anyone, was the next-in-line in the field! But he lost!
How was Bob Dole the next-in-line? The runner-up in ’92 was Pat Buchanan. And if primary challenges against incumbents don’t count, then Reagan in ’80 wasn’t the next in line, either.
In ’88, George H.W. Bush won because he was Reagan’s VP, not because he came in 2nd in 1980.
“For every problem, there is a solution that is plausible, elegant, and false.” – Mencken
Don’t give any of this ‘yet again’ bull.
June 25th, 2011 at 10:16 pm
I had hoped that Pawlenty would be doing better in this poll.
June 25th, 2011 at 10:17 pm
Lol MWS. Definitely a trip down memory lane. Your snide side hasn’t changed one bit! Lol
June 25th, 2011 at 10:17 pm
“Don’t give any of this ‘yet again’ bull.”
Since 1976, the runner-up for each primary has won the next oepn primary cycle.
Reagan was second in 1976, and won in 1980.
Bush I was second in 1980, and won in 1988.
Dole was second in 1988, and won in 1996.
McCain was second in 200, and won in 2008.
The only exception is 1996/2000
June 25th, 2011 at 10:21 pm
The Next In Line® theory is flexible enough to include all past nominees. If Ron Paul somehow manages to win the nomination next year, the Next In Line® disciplines will find a way to write him into the theory, and show that he was inevitable all along.
June 25th, 2011 at 10:22 pm
Matthew,
“Since 1976, the runner-up for each primary has won the next oepn primary cycle.”
Who was second in 1992?
June 25th, 2011 at 10:23 pm
The Next in Line theory works every time it doesn’t not work.
June 25th, 2011 at 10:23 pm
“Sad to read posts from IllinoisGuy. I have been here long enough to have known him and know today’s poll would’ve made him quite happy.”
Extremely, I’m sure. deffinitely one of the other most vocal supporters of Romney…
June 25th, 2011 at 10:25 pm
Jeff,
“Your snide side hasn’t changed one bit!”
God has given us each gifts. We can’t choose our gifts. We can only choose to use them..
June 25th, 2011 at 10:25 pm
“Who was second in 1992?”
Who was the next in line in 1984? or in 2004?
I don’t think I’ve ever seen the next-in-line theory include the no-namers who challenged sitting Presidents.
you say it can be formed to work for any situation, but lets JUST use the situation that the runner up wins the next open cycle…its worked 4 out of the last five times – 80%.
Thats nothing to scoff at.
June 25th, 2011 at 10:30 pm
Matthew,
Pat Buchanan was second in 1992, and hardly a “no-namer.” In fact, he pretty consistently polled about 1/3 of the primary vote. He spoke prime time at the convention, and delivered one of the most famous convention speeches of all time. He began 1996 as a top tier candidate because of his efforts in ’92.
“No namers” Bah!!!!!!!!!
June 25th, 2011 at 10:38 pm
I’ve been in Iowa 5 years now. Steve Dace used to have a drive time politics show on WHO in Des Moines. Every day it was 4 hours of Romney is a traitor and can’t be trusted.
If he campaigned here every day he’d maybe get 25% instead of 23%.
If he didn’t show up before the caucus he could still probably get 20.
Time and money are better invested elsewhere.
June 25th, 2011 at 10:39 pm
Matthew,
5 of our last 6 nominees also had either a four letter first name, or four letter last name. That’s over 80%. That’s even less to scoff at!
Too bad “Mitt” isn’t Willard’s first name.
Looks like this race will come down to Gary, Rick, Paul, Cain, or Newt. Too bad for Jon his parents didn’t go with the conventional spelling.
June 25th, 2011 at 10:49 pm
55, That does he explain why he decided not to go by his first name. I guess you count that as one more thing he’s done for political gain.
June 25th, 2011 at 11:06 pm
Seriously though, I don’t know what the odds are of this name phenomenon are, but the next in line phenomenon still seems unlikely if not explained by primary voters preferring a familiar face. I was made a believer after seeing McCain’s campaign be resurrected he repeated the next in line history even though every other indicator pointed that he was a goner. I don’t think it’s inevitable that the next in line will get, but it seems to be a great advantage. I also don’t see anyone that’s a strong enough candidate to shake Romney from this advantage.
June 25th, 2011 at 11:14 pm
The question I’d like to know is where the Gingrich and TPaw goes after they drop out. It seems clear now that both will drop out before too long. I suspect Romney gets some of that but how much????
June 25th, 2011 at 11:19 pm
John Mark,
There is no doubt that voter familiarity, along with the value of experience running for President, is a huge asset. As for what we can and cannot see, we are just now at the foot of a very tall hill that will take many months to climb. Who knows what will be, really? No one could have accurately written the narrative of 2008 in June of ’07.
June 25th, 2011 at 11:20 pm
The next in line theory does overlook that all of our nominees 1.) lost one of the two early states and 2.) were thought to have been almost dead after said lost. There was also a good deal of luck that the winners or a ruthlessnes that snatched victory from the jaws of defeat
1980: Reagan was behind George Bush by around 10 points in NH after the IA Caucuses. Without the famous “I’m paying for this microphone” moment, Reagan might well have lost.
1988: Bush came in 3rd to Dole and Robertson in IA and was losing in NH. If not for his biting “Senator Straddle” ad, Dole probably would have won
1996: Dole won an anemic victory in IA and lost in New Hampshire by a couple thousand votes. A swing of one or two points would’ve ended Dole’s last campaign in the snows of IA or NH.
2000: If Dubya’s supporters hadn’t gone after McCain with utter ruthlessness, he would’ve been defeated in South Carolina.
2008: Pretty much everything went McCain’s way in order for him to win the nomination.
June 25th, 2011 at 11:24 pm
38. Matt “MWS”,
Perhaps. So who are they liking more? Which candidate are they rallying around at the expense of Mitt?
June 25th, 2011 at 11:30 pm
7 – That is good spin, but unfortunately the Huckabee parallel isn’t going to work for you. Pawlenty is no Huckabee.
June 25th, 2011 at 11:38 pm
No one’s inevitable, that’s for sure. Romney’s in a nice position right now, though.
June 25th, 2011 at 11:47 pm
hamaca,
“Which candidate are they rallying around at the expense of Mitt?”
Bachmann is the current flavor, it appears.
June 25th, 2011 at 11:47 pm
38 – That is total bullcrap and you know it. That isn’t how polls work.
June 25th, 2011 at 11:49 pm
It’s better to look at the current state of the race than trying to draw historic parallels. Looking at the current race, Romney’s simply in a great position. He’s doing well enough in Iowa that even a loss won’t dent him since he’s not treating it as a “must win” state. Same thing in S. Carolina. Barring a major change, he’s cruising in New Hampshire and Nevada, which will make him a contender throughout the early primaries. No one appears ready to fight it out with him in the mountain regions, northeast, Florida, Michigan, or California. There’s a good 20 states where Romney’s in the drivers’ seat even if he picks up a strong opponent as the anti-Romney.
Perry, if he ever joins us, has a chance of running a southern strategy, but he’ll need to breakthrough in a lot of regions where Romney is dominating to stand a chance. I don’t even see a path to victory for most of the other candidates the way things stand.
June 25th, 2011 at 11:51 pm
I don’t buy the next in line theory, but I do buy the idea that the candidate has to have previously run. That has held true in all but three exceptional cases in the last 70 years. New comers don’t win, unless there is something unique about them that makes their name recognition very high. The only candidate that fits that description this year is Palin. For anyone besides Palin, Romney, or Paul to win would be very unprecedented.
June 25th, 2011 at 11:51 pm
Or Gingrich too, I guess (though I don’t even count him as a candidate anymore).
June 25th, 2011 at 11:53 pm
McCain was a terrible candidate. Anyone who thinks it didn’t help that he had previously ran and had a familiar face is fooling themselves.
June 25th, 2011 at 11:56 pm
60 – That is because the impact of Super Tuesday is often overlooked by political junkies. That is where being a familiar face has the biggest impact. I think the value of early races is highly overrated. The candidates don’t campaign in the big Super Tuesday races, because it is too expensive, but how often has a newcomer won any of those states? California, New York, Texas, etc, are almost always won by the candidate that has the highest profile.
June 25th, 2011 at 11:58 pm
64 – So even more people dislike Bachmann than Mitt it appears. There sure are a lot of “anti-Bachmann” voters out there.
June 25th, 2011 at 11:59 pm
#64:
Matt, I think the fact that there is a “flavor of the month” in the Anybody-but-Romney campaign is a telling weakness. First it was supposed to be Pawlenty, now it’s Bachmann, and soon it’ll be Perry (if he gets off his rear and actually enters the race). I think this constant change in the anti-Romney candidate will ultimately hamper its effectiveness.
June 26th, 2011 at 12:00 am
The key to winning the nomination for the frontrunner is to make the other candidates battle it out in the early primaries so they don’t have anything left for the later ones.
June 26th, 2011 at 12:01 am
How is Pawlenty going to fill 200 buses to dominate at Ames with only 6% of support in the state? Has anyone ever won Ames with that little support in the DMR poll?
June 26th, 2011 at 12:10 am
A snapshot of a moving train in the fog on a day when you forgot your glasses at home and didn’t focus the camera well . . .
And yet I feel a strange ebullience, June ’11. I will refrain from effervescent enthusiasm, choke off exuberance, stifle excitement.
nice poll for Romney, but it’s Iowa and it’s early, an that’s all there is about that!
June 26th, 2011 at 12:11 am
…you just described SARAH! as the general voting population has known her as a national figure.
=========================================
The truth is that she had to make coalitions with Democrats to get a lot of her agenda passed. She is going to have to do the job the MSM won’t do.
With Bachmann they won’t have to make up things. For example, Bachmann sat on a private school board that banned the Disney movie Aladdin because it had witchcraft.
June 26th, 2011 at 12:19 am
Jonathan,
“I think this constant change in the anti-Romney candidate will ultimately hamper its effectiveness.”
I agree, but there’s plenty of time, even when we run out of flavors. TPaw will have his shot again.
June 26th, 2011 at 12:24 am
I’m starting to think if Obama is reelected, 2016 may not prove as welcoming to the Next In Line theory. Lets think this one out
For those running
Romney -This is his second shot. Not believing a third shot is in the cards
Pawlenty -Could happen if he could stay politically relevant somehow.
Bachmann -Good shot but somehow she too needs to stay relevant somehow. Winning a senate seat or governorship would help, but can she in MN? Can she even win her seat back later on?
Huntsman -I have to think this IS his whole strategy. Get known, feel how it is to run for president and come back a much more familiar face. Cant say it will work, but he certainly isnt going to win it in 2012.
Cain, Gingrich, Santorum – Um, no…
Paul – Better shot at his son than him in 2016. Too old
Johnson, Karger – Who?? They ran in 2012?
I think the crop of new Republican governors and senators have a chance of breaking out in 2016 and for better or worse their respective narrative will probably resonate better than those currently in.
June 26th, 2011 at 12:29 am
I’m glad Romney’s up, but he will have trouble keeping Buchmann off his heals if he doesn’t beat her in Iowa. I think Romney should show more interest in Iowa. I think he could take both Iowa and New Hampshire.
June 26th, 2011 at 12:33 am
Good, my two favorite people up front. It would be historical to vote in the first woman president. And you KNOW whoever is the Republican nominee has the pleasure of retiring the worst. president. ever.
June 26th, 2011 at 12:34 am
I think Pawlenty is a much stronger candidate then this. I’m surprised he isn’t doing better. I’d vote for him a 100 times before I’d vote for Newt.
June 26th, 2011 at 12:35 am
It should be Romney. But if Bachmann is the best this country can do, go with it.
June 26th, 2011 at 12:35 am
Romney will not win Iowa. It’s one of those places that is far more likely to go for Bachmann than anyone else because it’s Iowa. They eat enough corn, or drink enough products made from corn syrup, maybe they are drinking corn syrup straight from the jug . . . they like Bachmann types. Bachmann mixes religion with politics. The right religion with the right politics. Back in Minnesota, this is barely popular among her district’s voters. Here in Iowa it will play well.
Romney’s decent showing will assure the rest of the Party he can do well enough in areas where Republicans smash the holy daylights out of Democrats anyways, and then he’ll go on to blitz NH, NV, and then FL.
Pawlenty was the only guy who stood any chance at all of building the coalition required to pull down Mitt, and now we know that it is very likely that Bachmann will beat or tie him in Iowa, so enfeebling him moving forward that no compelling narrative can be made for him in SC, the only other early state Mitt won’t blitz where success will carry any significance.
But I’m only getting started . . .
June 26th, 2011 at 12:35 am
Iowans like big spenders. Gingrich is getting mileage from his Tiffany account fame.
June 26th, 2011 at 12:36 am
#82 Bachmann isn’t going to beat Romney. She might get him in Iowa, but not in New Hampshire.
June 26th, 2011 at 12:37 am
85 I was just looking for some validation. She is likeable though, isn’t she?
June 26th, 2011 at 12:39 am
Still waiting for a genuine Huntsman supporter on this site. There aren’t any, are there. Wonder what that poser is up to?
June 26th, 2011 at 12:45 am
The only losers are the ones that aren’t running. Y’know?
June 26th, 2011 at 12:45 am
78:
You’re right. I’m fairly sure that if we lose this round, 2016 will go to one of the new blood candidates that weren’t ready this cycle. The only way I see any of them sticking around is if Pawlenty is named to the VP slot.
The GOP “bench” is currently rebuilding, but looks very strong 4 years from now. Take your pick of Rubio, Christie, Walker, Jindal, Haley, Pence, Kasich, Rand Paul, Brewer, Parnell, Ayotte, Mitch Daniels (no reason he’s not electable), etc. I’m sure that several of these won’t get into the race, and several others will crash and burn on the way (hopefully not Sanford style), but we’ve got a solid core of strong candidates to sort through.
And almost all of them are in the acceptable range for me.
June 26th, 2011 at 12:46 am
And the golfer that lives in the White House. Get off the golf course, ya moron.
June 26th, 2011 at 12:48 am
Michele Bachmann is almost done.
This is her high point.
It’s all down hill from here, but she’s too dumb to notice it. (not to mention some posters on this site)
This thing needs a shake up.
One is coming.
June 26th, 2011 at 12:49 am
I believe we cannot lose this round. Can’t afford that.
June 26th, 2011 at 12:50 am
So Michele Bachmann will announce for presi…OHMYGODSARAHPALIN!!
June 26th, 2011 at 12:50 am
Michelle Bachmann is not dumb. She’s a bit smarter than Palin, and both are plenty smart. You may have issues with accomplished women.
June 26th, 2011 at 12:51 am
Liz Cheney is smarter than Michele and Sarah. But smarts don’t get you elected, may I present Obama as exhibit 1.
June 26th, 2011 at 12:51 am
93. Hence the reason we can’t “afford” no executive experience and no accomplishments crazy eyes Michele Bachmann.
although she is keeping me safe from the gays.
I do appreciate that.
June 26th, 2011 at 12:52 am
Smarts obviously doesn’t get you a spot on The View, either.
June 26th, 2011 at 12:52 am
You find those crazy eyes attractive and it makes you lash out in fear.
June 26th, 2011 at 12:53 am
I agree Michele has no executive experience. That’s why I choose Mitt over her, though I find her remarkable nonetheless.
June 26th, 2011 at 12:53 am
99. um, no.
June 26th, 2011 at 12:54 am
100. Explains a lot.
June 26th, 2011 at 12:54 am
Bachmann will win IA hands down. I knew she was probably going to win IA way before the first debate. Why? Because IA voters are predictable imo. She is exactly what they want in a candidate.
As a Romney suppporter I have to say I like the Romney-Bachmann matchup going down the stretch, but for any Rombots who think he’s going to win IA, I’d say don’t even dream about it. IA will never pick Romney or Pawlenty while there are candidates like Bachmann or Cain. I just hope Romney can finish a strong second going into NH.
I’m surprised Pawlenty hasn’t given up on his IA strategy yet, he should have done it way earlier. Internally they had to know if Bachmann joined up he was toast in IA.
June 26th, 2011 at 12:57 am
No accomplishments? I’ll bet Bachmann has more education than you do, earns more (averaged over lifetime), has more kids than you do, and dresses better. What do you classify as “accomplishments”? Nobel Peace Prize?
June 26th, 2011 at 12:58 am
103. I agree, her combination of being a former sidewalk counselor in front of abortion clinics and now her re-education camps for gay teenagers is perfect for the ex-HuckaHillbillies here in Iowa.
Those are their only two issues, and wow..Bachmann scores higher than a Baptist Preacher!
June 26th, 2011 at 12:58 am
Look Tarheel, I agree and I’m not even breaking sweat over the idea that Romney doesn’t win Iowa. I’m confident he’s unconcerned about it as well.
June 26th, 2011 at 1:00 am
Ohhhh Teledude. I got your angle now. You’re anti-religion. Fine. Not a conservative attitude, but fine.
June 26th, 2011 at 1:03 am
93:
I’m just speculating. I actually think that the path to a Romney presidency is starting to clear up.
Obama’s going to get killed on both the economy and foreign policy. A Romney challenge doesn’t leave him much room to counterpunch. Romney’s become simultaneously disciplined and opportunistically aggressive. Add in the Mitt easily clears the electability and presidential weight bars with room to spare who runs well in purple states, and a weak incumbent who never really has shown particularly great campaign skills (no, 2008 wasn’t impressive), and you’ve got an election that is looking more and more dire for Obama.
June 26th, 2011 at 1:04 am
104. Go ahead and name one accomplishment.
Some vote she made in the House?
She has zero legislative achievements. Zero executive achievements.
She’s never -
balanced a budget
cut taxes
cut spending
done anything she was Personally responsible for, she’s just one of over 400 votes.
She has never been in any type of leadership position. She has no record of bringing legislators together to get an agenda passed. Nothing.
She talks “Tea Party” but is a Washington insider who takes farm subsidies for her dairy farm in Wisconsin and praises the Ag department for various Ag subsidies.
She’s (along with crony capitalist Romney) for the wasteful and undefendable ethanol subsidies.
Shew is at her peak and it is all down hill for this ding bat. Wait until the video of her hiding in the bushes at a gay pride day event comes out. She’s Cuckoo.
She is everything they have tried to portray Palin as.
Palin isn’t….she is.
Cuckoo
June 26th, 2011 at 1:07 am
108 you state it so beautifully. I am feeling extremely confident about a Romney victory. Barring extraordinary fraud or total economic collapse prior to the election, of course. I also feel that the more candidates that throw in, especially late in the process like we’re seeing now, the better for him. He’ll have to earn it no doubt, but he’s seasoned and disciplined enough that you won’t see him whining or being a crybaby. And it may very well be ugly.
June 26th, 2011 at 1:09 am
Duh…teledude, you just described Ron Paul too. Why you only pick on the girls?
June 26th, 2011 at 1:09 am
Why you don’t like capitalists?
June 26th, 2011 at 1:10 am
Why you eating pizza in your mom’s basement?
June 26th, 2011 at 1:10 am
Well, Obama is toast.
But squishy moderate crony capitalist Mitten$ is not going to have the cake walk his supporters may envision.
Sorry.
June 26th, 2011 at 1:11 am
Why you don’t think she should attend gay pride day events? Either she’s cuckoo, or you are. I’ll let society decide that one.
June 26th, 2011 at 1:12 am
Romney’s not squishy. For an old guy, he’s relatively hard body. Christie might be described as squishy. Why you hate capitalism?
June 26th, 2011 at 1:15 am
I think you’re disgust at religiously committed people makes you feel irrational and out of control. Am I right? Here’s a test – how do you feel about Huckabee? About Gov. Perry’s “fast and prayer” day? Don’t hold back.
June 26th, 2011 at 1:18 am
You don’t trust religious people, I suspect. I can relate because I don’t trust godless people. 80% of the nation is on my side. I’m not bragging, I’m just saying. So, how do you reconcile those types of attitudes? Who is religious enough to represent American values, but godless enough to weather the media and the suspicious non-religious minority?
June 26th, 2011 at 1:19 am
Huntsman might be the candidate for you.
June 26th, 2011 at 1:19 am
So much for my self ban. I’ll try again starting tomorrow.
June 26th, 2011 at 1:22 am
120. That would be nice.
Mark your time.
It’s about up.
This thing needs a shake up.
One is coming.
June 26th, 2011 at 4:02 am
Bachmann is still riding high with her success at the debates….but she needs to get out of the Tea Party rally mode and start being more specific on the issues…She needs to start telling voters why they should vote for her instead of giving bumper sticker sayings like “Lets make sure Obama is a one term President”…….She needs to get away from the personality of Bachmann and get on the campaign track…That’s where she’ll be tested.
If she can’t do that then that leaves an opening for Pawlenty.
June 26th, 2011 at 4:27 am
Two additional points not covered above, though this thread is likely dead for new comments.
1. Kathie Obradovich of the DMR, in her video explanation of the poll, discusses how they do the poll differently than others. They start with registered GOP and independent lists and ask them if they are definitely or likely to attend the caucuses. On this basis, the poll will likely under count independents and swing voters and those who have not made up their mind about caucusing at this point. Romney is unexpectedly doing best with people making less than $50,000, the economically disadvantaged. If he brings his message to IA and can get those people to come out, he could find a way to add to his current support on Caucus night.
2. The biggest impact this will have on Pawlenty is his fund-raising. As Jennifer Duffy of Cook Political Report said, if Pawlenty isn’t viable in IA, he is probably not viable for the nomination. This poll will extend the narrative of being weak in IA and the money he needs is likely to stay on the sidelines. That will make Ames a last stand. I expect that Pawlenty has attracted enough money to play strongly at Ames (Busses, food, entertainment, tickets, etc.) but he will have to push everything he has into the middle of the table to do it. He will have to pull back all expense in NH or SC and spend his time on the ground in IA or on the phone dialing for dollars, preferably from an IA area code. And he is going to have to beat Bachmann’s buzz and a new Paul mob/campaign that suddenly thinks it should be better organized on the ground. Anything short of an Ames win means Pawlenty’s outcome is probably sealed by Labor Day.
June 26th, 2011 at 5:51 am
Bachmann is a joke.
Pawlenty has been toast for 2/3 weeks now. It’s just that everyone is now seeing it.
June 26th, 2011 at 6:55 am
122- There is no opening for Pawlenty. I like Pawlenty, but you have to understand IA will never choose someone like him or Romney when they have Bachmann available. Barring a major gaffe by Bachmann, IA is in the bag.
If she messes up, that might be enough for Perry to toss his hat in the ring, and if he does, then IA voters will be eating from his hand.
June 26th, 2011 at 7:21 am
# TarheelRepublican Says:
June 26th, 2011 at 6:55 am
122- There is no opening for Pawlenty. I like Pawlenty, but you have to understand IA will never choose someone like him or Romney when they have Bachmann available. Barring a major gaffe by Bachmann, IA is in the bag.
==================================================
I still believe that Romney will take Iowa…. He is just playing a little rope a dope. He will pull out all the stops when it really counts.
June 26th, 2011 at 7:24 am
Tele:
With respect, I am disgusted with your anti-Bachmann tirades. This is disgrace to treat another Conservative like this. Yes Mrs. Bachmann is not as qualified as Mrs. Palin. However, I would much rather have her than either Mr. Obama or Mr. Romney.
June 26th, 2011 at 7:37 am
90 – Right, the next in line in 2016 (should we not win), would likely be the VP nominee. I think that counts as having run before, which is why I think Palin would be in play to win things this time (though she won’t).
June 26th, 2011 at 7:43 am
This poll will help Bachmann raise money. I agree that Pawlenty needs to think about a change of strategy. The all Iowa all the time strategy looks to be a flop. He isn’t Huckabee. He has been in Iowa forever and has been yearning to get recognized forever. He isn’t going to have a Huckabee surge. If he doesn’t win at Ames, he is finished in Iowa. You have said that yourself several times Smack. Can’t back away from that now.
June 26th, 2011 at 7:45 am
Perry will win Iowa.
Bank on it.
June 26th, 2011 at 7:52 am
Romney will spend more time in Iowa than he has. He has not and will not overlook it, even if he doesn’t win it. He would be more than happy with a Bachmann victory there (just like McCain was happy with a Huckabee victory in 2008).
Here is why he won’t give up on the state completely. I heard someone yesterday talking about how idiotic Huntsman’s decision to completely ignore Iowa was and I completely agree. Not only is he giving up the opportunity to get free press coverage by participating in the most covered race in the primary season, but he also is signaling the Republican base that he isn’t one of them.
He has said that he isn’t going to waste time in Iowa because of his lack of support for ethanol subsidies, but anyone with half a brain knows that is a lie. He isn’t going to Iowa because, though he has tried to downplay it, he is a Mormon and he thinks Mormons can’t win in Iowa. He may be right about that (though I don’t think he is), but skipping the state will be perceived by many as a signal that the issues important to the religious right aren’t worth fighting for for him. If Romney does the same thing, I think he will be giving off the same signal (though I think he has a better excuse to skip Iowa, given his failure there last time … he was rejected by the religious right before he gave up on them).
Romney will spend time in Iowa. He has the best organization in the state already. He is leading in all the polls. He has a huge base of support from last time. Not participating in Iowa is a sign of weakness, and he would be dumb to ignore it completely like Huntsman is. He may not win. He doesn’t need to win. He doesn’t need to spend as much time and resources there as he did last time. But he needs to be there and he will.
June 26th, 2011 at 7:54 am
126. Agreed. I’m an Iowa transplant living in FL. Branstad has been ‘ Gov for life’ and he’s not an Evangelical or a solid socon…he also makes Tpaw look like Mr. Excitement. Without Mike in the race I think Mitt wins Iowa.
June 26th, 2011 at 8:02 am
mac,
You really think so? Looking at all these Iowa polls the past 2 years tells me you could put Mitt up against the 3 Stooges and he’d be polling low to mid 20s. He seems to have a very low ceiling in Iowa.
June 26th, 2011 at 8:04 am
Heath,
“Pawlenty has been toast for 2/3 weeks now.”
That’s the same thing as 4.666667 days, correct?
June 26th, 2011 at 8:06 am
133 – That is total nonsense. Does this show that 94% of people hate Pawlenty too? Is there a stronger anti-Bachmann movement than an anti-Romney movement? That sure is a lot of anti-Pawlenty voters. Romney hasn’t spent more than a handful of days in Iowa this year. It is no wonder he isn’t dominating the polls given the amount of time the other candidates have spent there.
But I wouldn’t expect you to be fair on anything related to Romney. I think most here no where you stand with regards to him.
June 26th, 2011 at 8:18 am
133. MWS, if Tpaw recovers I could see him beating Mitt in Iowa, but he’s the only one. I think Iowans would choose Mitt over Perry.
June 26th, 2011 at 8:28 am
# Matt “MWS” Says:
June 26th, 2011 at 8:02 am
mac,
You really think so? Looking at all these Iowa polls the past 2 years tells me you could put Mitt up against the 3 Stooges and he’d be polling low to mid 20s. He seems to have a very low ceiling in Iowa.
========================================================================================
I think he is up against the three stooges (or maybe more). None of the contestants really have a shot at the nomination except for Romney. Any real competition decided not to run. Frankly, the only one I really thing could have given Romney a real run for his Money is Huckabee, and even then I think Romney would have prevailed.
Before you write off Romney, some one has to emerge as real competition and I don’t see that Happening.
June 26th, 2011 at 8:34 am
As an ‘Iowan at heart’ it bugs me when people say that Mike only won the caucus because he’s an evangelical or has charisma. Say what you will about how much of a fiscal conservative Huckabee was/is, but you can’t dispute that he was a competent, popular governor. Twice elected, he left office with a high approval rating and was an overwhelming choice in Arkansas for POTUS in 2008.
June 26th, 2011 at 8:49 am
138 – He also made vicious attacks on the integrity of Mitt Romney and made a huge gaffe two days before the caucuses that would have killed anyone else (the whole withdrawn attack ad sideshow). The only reason Huck overcame that was because of the strength of his evangelical base.
June 26th, 2011 at 9:00 am
Des Moines Register/Selzer & Co. Iowa 2012 GOP Caucus Survey
Mitt Romney 23%
Michele Bachmann 22%
Herman Cain 10%
Newt Gingrich 7%
Ron Paul 7%
Tim Pawlenty 6%
Rick Santorum 4%
Jon Huntsman 2%
Other 5%
Not sure 14%
Second Choice
Michele Bachmann 18%
Ron Paul 12%
Tim Pawlenty 12%
Herman Cain 10%
Mitt Romney 10%
Newt Gingrich 5%
Rick Santorum 4%
Jon Huntsman 2%
Other 4%
No first choice 14%
Favorable / Unfavorable {Net}
Michele Bachmann 65% / 12% {+53%}
Tim Pawlenty 58% / 13% {+45%}
Rick Perry 43% / 8% {+35%}
Chris Christie 45% / 14% {+31%}
Herman Cain 47% / 17% {+30%}
Paul Ryan 38% / 13% {+25%}
Sarah Palin 58% / 37% {+21%}
Ron Paul 53% / 32% {+21%}
Rick Santorum 38% / 17% {+21%}
Mitt Romney 52% / 38% {+14%}
John Bolton 21% / 17% {+4%}
Newt Gingrich 46% / 43% {+3%}
Jon Huntsman 22% / 19% {+3%}
Roy Moore 14% / 12% {+2%}
Rudy Giuliani 45% / 44% {+1%}
Gary Johnson 10% / 14% {-4%}
Buddy Roemer 8% / 13% {-5%}
Fred Karger 4% / 46% {-42%}
Have you attended caucuses in the past or will this be your first caucus?
Attended in the past 78%
Will be first caucus 21%
Is your mind made up to support the candidate named as your first choice, or could you still be persuaded to support another candidate as your first choice?
Mind is made up 14%
Could be persuaded to support another candidate 69%
Regardless of whom you support now, do you think there is at least one Republican candidate in the field who can defeat Barack Obama?
Yes 86%
No 7%
Not sure 7%
As you think about the important qualities in the next president, is it more important for that person to be a fiscal conservative or a social conservative, or is there something else that is more important?
Fiscal conservative 62%
Social conservative 20%
Something else is more important 7%
Not sure 11%
Survey of 400 likely Republican caucus-goers was conducted June 19-22, 2011. The margin of error is +/- 4.9 percentage points.
Inside the numbers:
June 26th, 2011 at 9:11 am
138– Mac…would Huckabee have won if he wasn’t an evangelic or didn’t have charisma? I don’t think he was picked because of his high approval ratings in Arkansas or his perceived competence as a governor in Arkansas. In fact, a lot of bad press came from Arkansas against Huckabee when it began to look like he might win IA.
Iowans didn’t care and they won’t care for Bachmann if she does happen to get bad press. Again, she’s a lock for IA, unless she makes a major gaffe. At which point someone like Perry might swoop in and take IA.
June 26th, 2011 at 9:16 am
139. Gary Bauer went no where in Iowa, Mike overcame his mistakes and won several states based on his various strengths as a candidate, not because he was an evangelical.
June 26th, 2011 at 9:18 am
#140:
To a large extent I agree. Huckabee won Iowa because 1.) he was the one candidate that Evangelical voters could rally around and 2.) He was just better at connecting with voters better than Romney or Thompson or the rest of the Iowa field. Finally, that line the night or two before the Caucuses’ “I’m like the guy you work with, not the guy who laid you off” was devastating to Romney’s chances (no matter how much the Romney folks hate it).
June 26th, 2011 at 9:22 am
#141:
Gary Bauer was also competing against George W. Bush, himself an Evangelical, and Alan Keyes, again also a very socially conservative candidate. Huckabee was lucky in that the candidate who could have given him the most trouble, Thompson, entered far too late to court the Evangelical base.
June 26th, 2011 at 9:28 am
139:
I would add that the mythical predictability of the Des Moines Register poll gave him a boost in the days just before the caucus.
It’s one thing I really hate about this poll. It’s become so “trusted” that the poll makes news instead of necessarily reflecting it. I don’t think Huckabee was actually ahead before it came out, but the poll became self-fulfilling when it shifted the momentum back in Huckabee’s favor after he’d had a terrible time leading up to it.
June 26th, 2011 at 9:34 am
142. At least you admit that Mike knows how to connect with voters.
June 26th, 2011 at 9:36 am
I’m tired of speculating.
Let’s get the show on the road.
June 26th, 2011 at 9:36 am
#145:
I would never deny that. Huckabee is far more natural at retail politics than someone like Romney. There’s no question about it.
June 26th, 2011 at 9:37 am
143. If Mike had half the funding of W, he’d win the nomination in a cake walk.
June 26th, 2011 at 9:39 am
141 – I’m not saying that the only reason Huck won was because he was an evangelical preacher. It was just an essential ingredient. Without it, he wouldn’t have gone anywhere.
June 26th, 2011 at 9:39 am
#146:
Oh, but we get to speculate for about 8 months, its part of the fun of politics.
June 26th, 2011 at 9:42 am
Michele Bachmann choked today.
She called Romney, ‘President Romney.”
She is a stalking horse vying for VP on the Romney ticket. How “Tea Party” is that? Still unwilling to point out any problems with Romneycare.
I’m telling you guys, she is a total fraud.
I used to really like and respect her, but I have looked into her record and…it’s troubling.
She says ‘I’ and ‘me’ more than Obama does, and for the same reasons. No real accomplishments she’s able to point to. Her experience is less than Obama’s, so like him, she is reduced to bragging.
This is her peak, her high point. She will not be able to stand in the bright light of all this scrutiny. People will learn the truth.
June 26th, 2011 at 9:42 am
145 – Has anyone denied that?
June 26th, 2011 at 9:45 am
#153:
Me thinks thou doth protest too much.
June 26th, 2011 at 9:50 am
153. Sounds like a personal problem;).
June 26th, 2011 at 9:50 am
Ohhhh Teledude. I got your angle now. You’re anti-religion. Fine. Not a conservative attitude, but fine.
========================================
There’s nothing anti-religious about being against religious extremism. I would suggest most religious people would allow their children to see Aladdin.
June 26th, 2011 at 9:54 am
I’d like to see Romney win Iowa and New Hampshire, certainly for his benefit, but also to ensure Iowa is able to stay relevant.
The state does an incredible service to our country by ensuring our party doesn’t become tunnel-visioned on economics and money by only having to focus on New Hampshire: Iowa ensures there is still talk about the family unit, traditional values, decency, the like – things that provide a strong social fabric for a healthy economy to build on.
June 26th, 2011 at 9:57 am
156
Agree
June 26th, 2011 at 9:57 am
Iowa and New Hampshire have never had the same winner in a non-incumbent year. I don’t expect this cycle to be any different.
=========================================
Even with a incumbent in 1976, Ford narrowly won Iowa and NH. The real question is whether there is someone who can win Iowa and come in a strong second in NH. I don’t see Bachmann as being able to do that.
June 26th, 2011 at 10:02 am
148:
Huckabee supporters always use the “if he had better funding” like it’s something out of his control. The reason that Huckabee never had any money was because he was dreadful at any organizational aspect of campaigning.
Huckabee himself has whined like crazy about his for years, completely oblivious to the fact that it’s only due to his own shortcomings.
June 26th, 2011 at 10:14 am
140- I think Bachmann probably takes Iowa as it stands now. If anyone else gets in, that just splits the anti-Romney vote and helps Romney win Iowa. The smart players realize this so the field might be set.
June 26th, 2011 at 10:18 am
159
Of course, the supporters of no other candidates ever complain about anything around here. Mike worked hard at fundraising, I’ve received dozens of requests for money from him via e-mail and snail mail. The GOP donating class doesn’t like him, period. If they did he’d win the nomination and, given his ability to connect to the people who have been hurt by this economy, he’d beat Obama.
June 26th, 2011 at 10:19 am
127. At least you stopped calling her half term quitter gov palin.
June 26th, 2011 at 11:08 am
Hoo. Looks to me like Michele or Ron win Ames, based on a WAG.
I don’t get all the Palinoid hatin’ on Michele. She’s had great reviews from folks ranging from Jen Rubin to Eric Erickson, The Weekly Standard, and the Powerline dudes.
Her showing on the half-hour Face the Nation this morning was solid.
June 26th, 2011 at 11:13 am
127
OHIO JOE,
Teledude,I and many others have plenty of reasons to dislike Mrs Backmann.
Until Sarah Palin endorsed her she was unknown two terms congresswoman.
In one day governor Palin raised almost million dollars for her,which gave her large mailing list to shamelessly solicit money 24/7.
In return Michele Backman was consistently silent when Sarah Palin was
viciously attacked after Tuscon tragedy.Not a peep from that ingrate.
Just this morning Bob Sheiffer asked her twice to contrast herself from
Mitt Romney,like RomneyCare,AlGore’s global warming hoax…
She refused both times.And called Mittens president Romney in a classic
Freudian slip.
Anything else you need to know and see that she’s a stalking horse,that
she’s running for VP with Mitt?
Mitt Romney is nothing more than naked ambition political opportunist,
Michele Backmann is the same.
The only difference is Mitt is quiet and Backmann is big,loud mouth who
will run you over to get to the mike and TV camera.
June 26th, 2011 at 11:22 am
Someone upthread correctly said that the last campaign wasn’t determinative, and I agree. But just for an idea of how the race for Iowa stood back in June of ’07, here were some numbers I found (all for Iowa AFAICT):
Mitt’s near the same place he was then, and if T-Paw is the new Huck, he’s at Huck’s relative position. If Bachman is the new Huck, she’s way way ahead of where Huck was then — more like female Huck-Fred hybrid. Just don’t even try to imagine that.
June 26th, 2011 at 11:23 am
The missing link…
June 26th, 2011 at 11:26 am
“Mitt Romney is nothing more than a naked ambition political opportunist,
Michele Backmann is the same.”
==========================================
They found each other.
But unfortunately for them,Sarah Palin is the brick wall in their way.
She will beat those two phonies,fakes and frauds like a drum.
June 26th, 2011 at 11:28 am
Hey TEX
http://www.rightspeak.net/2011/06/hey-rush-heres-chris-christie-and-sarah.html
June 26th, 2011 at 11:32 am
I don’t read “rightspeak”.
June 26th, 2011 at 11:32 am
123- Good point about Romney doing well with people making under 50,000. His economic message may work in Iowa if he plays it.
Romney has tied his fortunes completely to the economy. If the economy doesn’t improve, he has a good chance of winning Iowa (and of course the nomination) and the General. If the economy does improve, he might win the nomination, but he doesn’t have a much of a chance in the general. Of course, neither does anyone else.
Economic issues in recent times are the only ones that have brought down sitting presidents. He may be an opportunist as Tex says, but you have to admit that the situation does play to his strengths.
June 26th, 2011 at 11:37 am
Massachusetts Confusion.
That is 2008.
We’ve had this discussion.
That you keep bringing it up shows desperation on your part.
This thing needs a shake up.
One is coming.
June 26th, 2011 at 11:48 am
171
Desperation? You mean I’m scared that Mitt is only leading national polls by 9%? Or I’m desperate because he’s only leading New Hampshire by 30%?
Or his $30 million PLUS Q2 numbers are too low?
Or all his opposition candidates are perfect?
Hmmmm
June 26th, 2011 at 11:51 am
161:
Huckabee couldn’t organize and fundraise worth crap. I got the impression that it was an aspect of campaigning he was never really serious about or interested in, but if you’re right and he worked really hard at it, then it just means he’s more incompetent than I thought.
June 26th, 2011 at 11:58 am
170
“He may be an opportunist as Tex says, but you have to admit that the situation does play to his strengths.”
========================================
Only until Sarah Palin confronts and exposes Romney for this myth that because he made tons of money in 1980′s as LBO raider,”artist”,paying
millions of dollars in “Golden Parachutes” to corrupt managements and
stealing 100′s of millions of dollars in other peoples assets for pennies on a dollar,that somehow makes him “mr economy”,although he’s a member and beneficiary of corrupt Crony Capitalism.
After Sarah Palin runs down her great and stand out successes as governor
of Alaska all she needs to do is ask:
“Mr. Romney,tell us just one of your stand out successes.We don’t want
to hear run of the mill things that all governors do and struggle with.
No,tell us only about your stand out success.There is none.
We know about boondoggle and albatross RomneyCare that Obama used as
blueprint for ObamaCare,so spare us the spin.”
June 26th, 2011 at 12:27 pm
168. Of the trio Palin, Christie, and Willard, one has the heart of Rush, and another has the endorsement of Gore. ‘Nuff sed.
June 26th, 2011 at 12:36 pm
173
Mike has a great grass roots organization, you can’t build the top of an organization with funds and I’ve already explained why that didn’t happen, which had nothing to do with incompetence or effort.
June 26th, 2011 at 12:53 pm
175
Anyone stupid enough to believe that Al Gore likes Mitt does not belong in my party. And anyone that stupid was going to vote for Donald Trump anyway.
June 26th, 2011 at 12:55 pm
176
*without* funds
June 26th, 2011 at 1:18 pm
Ahem!
LOL!
June 26th, 2011 at 1:20 pm
179
GENIOUS! I’ve never heard anything like that before! How original!
Too bad there is no evidence of this.
June 26th, 2011 at 1:21 pm
I have read all comments on this here ol thread.
August 13th is going to give me such great delight.
I will try to be a gracious winner…but it’s going to be difficult…after reading all these comments.
TPAW’s FAVS are excellent in this DMR poll. Bachmann will now be tested. TPAW is considered now not to be a threat to Bachmann at AMES…………hhhhheeeeeheheheheheeee.
None of you have any idea what is about to happen…do you?
TPAW victory at AMES!
You have two choices…either follow Smackdaddy to victory…or follow the rest of the sheep here at RACE42012.
I think 99% of you love to graze in the grass.
Iowa is TPAW country!!
June 26th, 2011 at 1:28 pm
If Pawlenty is going to change the direction of his campaign in IA, he needs to get some help fast. He needs someone who can get people to Ames regardless of his current poll numbers and financial position. (Remember, Q2 FEC reports will come out a month before Ames.) But who has that kind of clout and that kind of motivation?
If it is to be believed that a 3 term congresswoman from a northern state cannot win the nomination, and that in winning IA she would radically improve the chance of the national front runner (Romney) of winning the nomination, Bob Vanderplats would be your guy. If TPaw can get that organization behind him, he can still pull out Ames and the caucuses. Otherwise, it will be a long uphill battler, probably ending unsatisfactorily.
June 26th, 2011 at 1:34 pm
Smack, I completely agree with you that Bachmann is unvetted at this point and that there are many things in her background that should give people serious pause, especially given the challenges that face this nation. I can see a case for her fading over the next 6 months, but probably not in time for Ames.
I wish you genuinely good luck.
June 26th, 2011 at 1:40 pm
Still Hurting,
We got the organization for AMES….
TPAW recived a FAV/UNFAV of 58/13 second only to Bachmann in this poll.
TPAW has been vetted for two months and he still has a very good FAV/UNFAV ratio in Iowa.
Now Bachmann will be vetted…can she survive the heat?
I like where TPAW sits in Iowa….I just do.
TPAW will win at AMES…and then will see where TPAW’s numbers are at on Sept 1st.
TPAW will be breathing down Bachmann’s neck.
It’s going all according to plan.
TPAW playing small ball.
1st AMES…then the rest will follow.
June 26th, 2011 at 1:59 pm
Smack, What might have been your biggest nightmare may now be your biggest relief. Bachmann is the one who has to manage expectations. So, if Ron Paul pulls off the win in Ames, Bachmann is the one who looks like she squandered her chance. And that leaves Pawlenty to pick the challenge in the Fall.
June 26th, 2011 at 2:03 pm
I keep reading Smack describing how an entire election rests on the whims of August straw poll voters in Ames, Iowa, and can only shake my head in disbelief.
I’m not saying he’s wrong, just that it underscores just how f’ed up our nominating process truly is. The Iowa/NH duopoly gives us candidates (and sometimes Presidents) like Jimmy Carter, Mike Dukakis, Barack Obama, etc. (Yes, I realize Republicans are a bit different, but point stands.)
Until we abandon the myth of “the insurgent,” we’re never going to get Presidents we need.
What we need is a national primary. To compete in a national primary, a candidate will have had to demonstrate the longevity, success, connections and stature in the party to raise enough money and present a compelling case to the voters. And its more likely that a candidate who’s succesful doing that will also be a succesful President.
The Ames, Iowa straw poll. I mean, really?
June 26th, 2011 at 2:13 pm
One other point about these results is they are a snapshot taken at the very best time for Bachmann and just before Pawlenty launches his ads. Bachmann’s numbers may be artificially high in this poll. It will be good if she can hold on to it, but future polls that sag may lend themselves to narratives that she isn’t the real deal. And in politics, those kinds of narratives can be planted by opposing campaigns. Just sayin’.
June 26th, 2011 at 2:48 pm
The trouble with Michelle Bachmann is that she has too many things in her background that would make her toxic on a ticket. Her statements on gays goes far beyond being against gay marriage. She banned the showing of Aladdin in a school because it had witchcraft on it. Mike Huckabee is a religious conservative and he does not have a history of crazy comments. If she is anywhere on the ticket ythose statements will be paraded ad nauseum and unlike Palin they won’t have to make it up.
The only reason the establishment is pushing Bachmann is they are hoping to keep Palin out. Once she outlives her usefulness, the media will pound her like a rock and they won’t have to make it up. Earlier this year, Ed Rollins called her a unserious candidate. Former Gov Arne Carlson summed up the establishment thinking on Bachmann,”The fact that she’s not a heavy lifter, the fact that she’s relatively unconcerned about the substance of legislation”
June 26th, 2011 at 3:07 pm
184 – How do you fill the buses?
June 26th, 2011 at 3:08 pm
187 -Pawlenty’s ad buy is tiny. That won’t have a serious impact.
June 26th, 2011 at 3:11 pm
Franklin,
Bachmann will fall on her own.
That’s is why I’m only looking at TPAW’s numbers compared to the other possible Mitt alternatives.
Bachmann will not stand up well under the lights.
Bachmann will surprise many people here at RACE42012 when she doesn’t come in first place at AMES.
Bachmann has an advantage in these early polls in that she is much more distiquishable to the other candidates for the low information voters…..just like Cain.
Cain has hit his ceiling…so has Ryan.
Gingrich is only going to go down.
Romney will level off at around 18-20 points in Iowa..not going full time will make it impossible for him to be higher.
TPAW with FAV/UNFAV at 58/13 is quite good and his top line numbers are only going to go up.
Bachmann is the wild card. She has always underperformed in the 6th district in her elections I believe at the end of the day Iowa will not give here the win.
Maybe I’m wrong…..but I don’t think so.
MISSION: TPAW VICTORY AT AMES!!!
June 26th, 2011 at 3:17 pm
Jaxemer11,
We will be ready for AMES.
It’s Bachmann that has to worry.
The expectations are now that she will win at AMES.
The Bachmann team is not ready..nor will they be in time.
The 6% in this poll will hold TPAW back as much as Hucks’s low poll numbers at this time in June “07″…..it won’t.
Ames will be close…..but TPAW will have his victory.
Nothing has changed in this race since the start.
If you ask the Romney people right now, they still expect TPAW to finish strong in Iowa and win it.
Stay alert..watch and learn.
June 26th, 2011 at 3:21 pm
192 – You didn’t answer the question. How do you fill 200 buses while polling at 6%?
June 26th, 2011 at 5:14 pm
176:
Huckabee’s organizations were built before he got there. He merely co-opted the Fair Taxers and church groups.
And did they not have money? This isn’t 1988 anymore where big doners are king. This is the age of the $20 internet donation. The moneymen can be bipassed.
June 26th, 2011 at 5:49 pm
Where are you Rombots?
Can any of you come up with Romney’s one,just one,stand out,memorable success as governor of Massachusetts?After all he’s mr LBO “artist”
(with his Wall Street fat cats bankers money),mr “fix it”,don’t you know.
One success that is seared in people’s mind like Sarah Palin’s several outstanding successes that no governor has ever achieved anywhere.
Sarah Palin will ask him this in the first debate.
Common now,think hard,I say there is none,try to prove me wrong.
I’ll give you some slack,I won’t mention the boondoggle and albatross
around Willard’s neck.
June 26th, 2011 at 5:56 pm
194
Mike had as many donors as anyone; they just came in at $5, $10 and $20 increments, not many $5,000 check writers in his fold.
June 26th, 2011 at 6:03 pm
196:
Once again, we’re living in an age where the max contributers do not control things. Plenty of candidates have funded from grassroots small-doners in the last few years. Huckabee did poorly by their standards.
June 26th, 2011 at 6:53 pm
197.
Obama and Ron Paul had a lot of success with small donors on the internet and, obviously, Mike’s fundraising totals were dismal, but it wasn’t for lack of donors. Mike’s support comes from mostly from the middle class down, also a lot of evangelicals tithe, which explains how he can have a lot of donors but end up with little to show for it.
June 26th, 2011 at 7:49 pm
That’s an excuse, and a poor one. I don’t know the number of doners he had, but I frankly doubt your contention that he had as many as anyone else.
The fact is, he FAILED at a key campaign benchmark. It wasn’t that other people cheated, or the world was against him, or his contributors were just too generous to charities and could only afford a nickel a head. If the big money guys weren’t giving money to him, he should have worked them harder. If his base wasn’t giving money to him, he should have found new sources.
Instead, Mike chose to get on national television and whine about it for 3 years and counting. Okay, and I’m sorry but whining about your own shortcomings isn’t going to stop Obama from drowning you in a $1 billion campaign when you don’t know how to outraise third tier candidates.
June 26th, 2011 at 8:30 pm
Most of the time, Romney’s fundraising exceeded Huck’s by a large margin even among small donors, though it may be Huck’s donors were giving five and ten dollars while Romney’s were giving twenty and fifty. Of course, money isn’t everything in Iowa, but I’m not sure what Tpaw’s going to use to take the place of Huck’s Fair Tax and church groups. Smack can’t do it alone, guys.
June 26th, 2011 at 8:56 pm
Admitting that his fundraising totals were dismal is another way of saying he failed, so I already conceded that point, however, whether you doubt my contention or not I can tell you that one of the ways we as Huckfans consoled ourselves every quarter was by the fact that Mike’s number of donors frequently outpaced everyone but Ron Paul. Given his solid poll numbers, I don’t think it’s too difficult to imagine that what I’m saying is true.
So how could he poll so well and raise so little money? I’ve offered an explanation but you don’t like it. As to your other points:
“If the big money guys weren’t giving money to him, he should have worked them harder.” Do you honestly believe that Rudy and Fred out worked Mike on fundraising? Fred was on standby for a nap, when these guys ask for dough it’s either yes or no. and for Mike, it was usually no.
“If his base wasn’t giving money to him, he should have found new sources.” How? By pandering to the potheads, ahem, libertarians, like a couple other candidates who shall remain unnamed.
“Mike chose to get on national television and whine about it for 3 years and counting.” I follow Mike fairly closely somehow I’ve missed that whining you say he’s doing.
Mike Huckabee is the one guy on the GOP landscape that has the ability to connect to the voters who are being hurt by this economy and they are the very same voters who will decide this election.
June 26th, 2011 at 9:39 pm
Number of donations through Dec 31, 2007:
Romney = 90,076,402
Huckabee = 9,003,810
Looks like someone is wrong.
June 26th, 2011 at 9:41 pm
Here’s the link, by the way:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundraising_for_the_2008_United_States_presidential_election#cite_note-18
Note that what I listed was number of receipts and not unique donors. Obviously there were not 90 million separate people that gave to Romney. Still, the number of receipts are pretty compelling proof that the idea that Huckabee attracted more donors than Romney is bull.
June 26th, 2011 at 10:16 pm
We have already gotten one good talker young president(Mr.Obama) so we need no more second good talker young lady (Michelle) for president,you guy don’t know how struggle we are now (we are so hungry and too tired to looking for any job,no gas for our car and hopeless)we need a successful leader and most experienced like Mitt come to get America back to work,we want to go to work,we are too tired to stay home and wait for EDD and welfare EBT card week by week or month by month, please take the right person for the right job and the right leader for the right country,Obama and Michelle have nothing to compare with Mitt,enough is over enough.
June 26th, 2011 at 11:36 pm
Bachmann is doing a great job of taking out Pawlenty, which is exactly what she is supposed to do. She is to Romney what Huckabee was to McCain…
June 27th, 2011 at 12:53 am
He’s constantly talking about how he was outspent. It’s his default defense for not winning the nomination.
It’s rather pathetic.
Don’t know about Thompson, but I know that Giuliani worked hard for campaign contributions. Hell, I was hearing radio ads begging for money in early ’07 down here in Florida.
Granted he would have been better off actually, erm, campaigning, at some point, but Giuliani wasn’t just watching the money come in. Neither was Romney or even McCain for that matter.
June 27th, 2011 at 1:52 am
Could you maybe see romney playing purposefully for 2nd in iowa? Maybe he won’t want to win iowa, because he can get better results down the stretch by ensuring that bachmann wins iowa…rather than pawlenty or someone else? He’s gonna win new hampshire and nevada. If he wins those, and gets 2nd in iowa…he’ll probably win florida, and then it will be over. But Bachmann will be a power player and an influence on this race…that’s for sure.
June 27th, 2011 at 7:56 am
Jax,
No one is doubting Romney’s fundraising ability or the willingness of his fans to ‘put their money where there mouth is.’ There was more than one quarter where Mike had the most donors (other than Paul) from 2008 to date for unique donors. I looked at your link and checked the FEC site, but couldn’t find the info I was looking for to back up my claim, so call bull if you’d like.
However, my point is that Mike doesn’t lack for number of donors. What he lacks is donors who can give more than lunch money.
June 27th, 2011 at 8:00 am
Thomas Alan,
“He’s constantly talking about how he was outspent.”
You can call it pathetic, you can also call it a fact or answering a question when asked.
“I was hearing radio ads begging for money in early ’07 down here in Florida.”
Rudy had the money to run ads that Mike didn’t have, that’s not working harder.
June 27th, 2011 at 8:31 am
208 – I will call bull … not because I don’t like you or want to pick a fight, but because facts are facts. The numbers are right there in the link I posted (and they are sourced from the FEC, so it isn’t just something some random person made up on wikipedia). Huckabee never had more donors than Romney.
June 27th, 2011 at 9:19 am
Coming up with an excuse and implying that it was somehow unfair is not “answering a question”.
It’s not like Huckabee was lamenting his own mistakes. He was using it as some sort of a club against his opponents (years after the race ended). It’s Huckabee who doesn’t get that these are his own problems.
June 27th, 2011 at 10:11 am
tpaw is losing to ron paul and herman cain.
June 27th, 2011 at 10:40 am
210
Jax,
I have no choice but to yield to you because I don’t have the time to dig for the numbers and I shouldn’t have made the claim unless I could back it up. However, I’ll stand behind two points:
1) Mike has enough donors; the problem is that his donors for the most part don’t have two nickels to rub together.
2) Mike Huckabee is the one guy on the GOP landscape that has the ability to connect to the voters who are being hurt by this economy and they are the very same voters who will decide this election.
211.
Thomas Alan,
If you say so, peace.
June 28th, 2011 at 9:21 pm
[...] Washington Post’s Chris Cillizza and Aaron Blake penned an enlightening analysis of the Des Moines Register poll that hit the newswires Saturday: The new Des Moines Register poll provides some clues — by [...]