Courtesy of Dave Wissing.
PRESIDENT – IOWA – DEM PRIMARY
John Edwards 24%
Hillary 18%
Barack Obama 18%
Tom Vilsack 14%
Joe Biden 5%
Bill Richardson 3%
Wesley Clark 2%
Chris Dodd 1%
Dennis Kucinich 1%PRESIDENT – IOWA – GOP PRIMARY
Rudy Giuliani 29%
John McCain 22%
Newt Gingrich 11%
Mitt Romney 9%
Chuck Hagel 5%
Tommy Thompson 3%
Tom Tancredo 2%
Sam Brownback 2%
Mike Huckabee 2%
Jim Gilmore 1%
Duncan Hunter 1%PRESIDENT – CALIFORNIA – DEM PRIMARY
Hillary 34%
Barack Obama 24%
John Edwards 16%
Bill Richardson 7%
Dennis Kucinich 4%
Joe Biden 4%
Chris Dodd 1%
Tom Vilsack 0%
Mike Gravel 0%PRESIDENT – CALIFORNIA – GOP PRIMARY
Rudy Giulaini 41%
John McCain 17%
Mitt Romney 10%
Duncan Hunter 6%
Sam Brownback 4%
Tom Tancredo 4%
Mike Huckabee 2%
Ron Paul 1%
Jim Gilmore 0%
The Iowa numbers come to us from Strategic Vision. Check out the full poll results here.
On the Democratic side, Edwards maintains his lead in Iowa, with Hillary and Obama closing hard. The former North Carolina senator’s tepid numbers in California mirror the preferences of Democrats in almost every other state, leading me to suspect that Edwards’ Iowa numbers are more of a lagging indicator of the strength of his candidacy than anything else.
On the GOP side, look at Rudy’s numbers in the Golden State! Giuliani leads rivals John McCain and Mitt Romney by 24 and 31 points, respectively, and appears poised to clean up in delegate-rich California, which plans to hold its presidential primary on February 5th, 2008, along with a number of other delegate-heavy, Rudy-friendly states, such as New York, New Jersey, Illinois, and Florida. If Rudy’s numbers continue to take off as voters in these states and elsewhere get to know him, the converse of what some predicted, the race for the GOP nod may be essentially over by next February’s Super Duper Tuesday.
February 22nd, 2007 at 1:36 pm
Wow!
Now this is good news for Rudy. I don’t think anyone expected him to win in conservative Iowa.
February 22nd, 2007 at 1:38 pm
Romney’s numbers are good in California, too, Dave, and you didn’t mention it. Your bias towards Rudy is laughable; go take a cold shower.
February 22nd, 2007 at 1:41 pm
Lurker,
Romney coming in at third place with 10%, is not good.
February 22nd, 2007 at 1:47 pm
[...] post by DaveG and software by Elliott [...]
February 22nd, 2007 at 1:51 pm
TM, given his placement in most polls, it IS good. It shows that he is moving upward in some polls, not simply downward. I live in Southern California. The border issue is huge to many Republicans down here. That he is polling above Tancredo and Hunter (one of our own) is something to be said. But enjoy your Kool-Aid!
February 22nd, 2007 at 1:54 pm
Romney at 9% in Iowa, despite using it as a second home for much of the past year. I don’t get it. Romney’s been to Iowa probably as much as Edwards has, yet Edwards was able to translate it into a solid lead over his competition and Romney barely nudges past his national numbers.
Maybe Romney’s not as strong in Iowa as I had assumed. If Romney can’t win in Iowa, he’s pretty much done with.
February 22nd, 2007 at 1:58 pm
This poll will give us a good idea of how much Romney’s ad campaign helps him. It was completed two days before his campaign ads hit the airwaves. The next Strategic Vision poll will be very interesting.
In other news, I will be taking a blogging hiatus for the next little while. Don’t expect any new posts for the next month and a half or so. I’ll still drop in to read what everyone else is posting once in a while, just not posting my own stuff.
See you guys in April!
February 22nd, 2007 at 1:59 pm
“If Romney can’t win in Iowa, he’s pretty much done with”
LJ has a good point,
Romney has been spending a lot of time and money in Iowa. Coming in at fourth place at 9% is pathetic.
February 22nd, 2007 at 2:27 pm
DaveG
On a lighter note, Dick Morris does not agree with your dismissal of Edwards’s chance, which of course means you’re probably right.
I heard him on O’Reilly today and he bet him a dinner somewhere if Edwards fizzles out early. O’Reilly’s rejoinder was priceless: “so how many dinners do you owe me now anyway?”
February 22nd, 2007 at 2:27 pm
I would like to take this opportunity to make a prediction. Hillary Clinton will NOT be the
Dem nominee. Barack will NOT. Vilsack will NOT. The democratic nominee will be… Wesley Clark.
Military man – - American hero (of sorts).
Intelligent.
Excellent communicator.
Not a woman.
Not black.
Fairly conservative for a dem.
He will be the savior of the democratic party just like Rudy is.
February 22nd, 2007 at 2:29 pm
HeavyM,
Why the extended break from blogging? I hope everything is alright.
February 22nd, 2007 at 2:31 pm
KT,
Clark, just like Richardson and Vilsack is a Clintonite. If anything, he’d be the Veep, but he’s not running for President.
February 22nd, 2007 at 2:49 pm
Great news for Romney in California. I actually am surprised he polled that high there. He has made very
few appearances there and he is polling only 7% behind McCain. Once the name recognition rises, look out.
February 22nd, 2007 at 3:15 pm
Romney’s polling high in California for the same reason he’s polling relatively high in other blue states: blue state Republicans simply play well in blue states. About two months ago, he was at 2% in California in some other poll. He’s improved, in no small part I’m sure, because of increased name recognition. I’m sure Rudy polls well in California because of blue state cultural identification as well.
February 22nd, 2007 at 3:21 pm
LJ:
I believe he is in the process of deciding to run. He said so on FOX the other day.
February 22nd, 2007 at 3:32 pm
Matt, I’m glad to see that you are happy with a third place at 10% in CA, but how do you spin Romney’s fourth place at 9% in Iowa. Especially after all the time and money he has spent there.
February 22nd, 2007 at 3:35 pm
Significant bad news for Rudy backers: seems the governator of Collyfawnya has just about endorsed John McCain for president.
February 22nd, 2007 at 3:39 pm
LJ:
What don’t you get?
ROMNEY is N O T a good candidate. People see through his pandering for what it is.
February 22nd, 2007 at 3:42 pm
I don’t spin it. Romney’s been between 8-13% in Iowa for months. And he’s yet to show any truly strong polling outside of blue states. At the moment, Romney’s viewed as a moderate conservative, who maybe flip-flops too much, and has a weird religion. I don’t expect that he’s going to be terribly successful, no matter how many times he’s visited the state, in the heartland (Iowa GOP primary voters are quite conservative) until he convinces people he’s a real conservatie. If he doesn’t, he loses. If he does, he becomes essentially another Rudy in terms of electability. For my money it could go either way at this point.
February 22nd, 2007 at 3:43 pm
I second that. I am waiting for people to start speaking up about him. The guy is so artificial.
February 22nd, 2007 at 3:48 pm
Where have you been KT? You and your ilk (the undistinguishable masses of Rudy supporters) have been “speaking up” about him for months. Thus, all the hit pieces here.
February 22nd, 2007 at 3:53 pm
Sad to see you go HeavyM. It’s going to be a non-stop Romney hit parade with you gone.
February 22nd, 2007 at 6:06 pm
Likewise sad to see you go HeavyM. Now there’s one more happy thing to look forward to in April.
February 22nd, 2007 at 8:21 pm
Poll Alert: Iowa and California…
…
February 22nd, 2007 at 8:27 pm
To me the biggest news coming out of te Iowa poll is that Brownback really has taken a tumble after that “poll” their camp was touting around.
February 22nd, 2007 at 9:10 pm
Jason,
Who knows where Gingrich’s votes will go when it becomes apparent that he won’t run, though? Brownback is poised to take up a nice share of those, I’m sure. And who knows how long Mittflopgate will go on? If Romney doesn’t survive it and wilts, Brownback could rise up to take that third challenger spot.
February 22nd, 2007 at 9:31 pm
Comparing Romney’s support in Iowa to Edwards is a little presumptious. Edwards already has a presence lingering from the last election over 2 years ago when Mitt was halfway through his term as governor.
HeavyM,
Have a good break. Who will fill in the vacuum for Romney apologist/myth dispeller now? I’d step up to bat, except I’ll be busy with school until May. Even though I’ll still be lurking in the forums for an inordinate amount of time. Funny how that works.
February 22nd, 2007 at 9:48 pm
Heavy M,
Must you go? I will sincerely miss your insightful pieces. What a shame that Kavon, DaveG, Republius, LJ, and Woodrow will be slamming Romney profusely during the next month with no resident blogger to defend him (don’t get me wrong guys-you are all very insightful and great writers; just not the most generous when it comes to cutting Romney some slack). I hope you can at least make a post or two when the 1Q fundraising reports come in as I’m sure the other bloggers will write off Romney’s likely first place. Hope everything is well in your world, and can’t wait till you come back in April.
February 22nd, 2007 at 10:08 pm
Woodrow, that is a big “if!” I think Romney stands just as much o chance as picking those votes up as Brownback. If McCain keeps sliding down the polls or dies of old age, Romney will definitly reap those numbers.
February 23rd, 2007 at 5:10 am
Heavy M,
Will be looking forward to your return. Us Romney supporters really appreciate your work.
February 23rd, 2007 at 7:22 am
HeavyM,
Hope all is well with you and yours. Don’t stay gone for too long. You will be greatly missed on this site. All the best.