The Candidates
Fox News released a poll out for the 2008 primaries in South Carolina.
| Rudy Giuliam | 26 |
| John McCain | 25 |
| Mitt Romney | 14 |
| (Newt Gingrich- vol.) | 5 |
| Sam Brownback | 2 |
| Mike Huckabee | 2 |
| (Fred Thompson- vol.) | 2 |
| Tommy Thompson | 2 |
| Jim Gilmore | 1 |
| Duncan Hunter | 1 |
| Ron Paul | 1 |
| Tom Tancredo | 1 |
| (Chuck Hagel- vol.) | - |
| Other | 1 |
| Don’t Knoe | 16 |
I am assuming those who’s names are in parenthesis were volunteered, not sure though.
The latest polling previous to this for South Carolina I could find is at RCP. You can see the jumps and drops here.
April 8th, 2007 at 3:51 pm
[...] post by Jason and software by Elliott [...]
April 8th, 2007 at 4:51 pm
Yeap, 16% undecided.. Shows my point that a second tier candidate could do some wiggle room!
April 8th, 2007 at 4:51 pm
Quick notes in reviewing the poll’s findings…
In contrast to the relative satisfaction with Giuliani, there is a lot of soft support for McCain and Romney.
30% of Rudy’s supporters are “extremely” or “very” satisfied with the choice of candidates for the 2008 election. 25%, McCain…22%, Romney.
Only 20% of Rudy’s supporters are “not very satisfied” with the choices available. 32%, McCain…29%, Romney.
35% of Rudy’s supporters are certain to support him…McCain comes in at 30% certain support…Only 20% of Romney’s supporters are certain of their support.
Interestingly, McCain, the “surge’s” biggest advocate, has the lowest support amongst voters supporting the war in Iraq.
Giuliani 79%
Romney 75%
McCain 68%
I was very surprised to see that only 59% of South Carolina Republicans consider themselves ‘pro-life’ on the issue of abortion.
And, that 53% of Rudy’s supporters are pro-life…not much different from McCain’s 54%. Meanwhile, 64% of Romney’s supporters are pro-life.
Naming the #1 factor in determining who to vote for, 36% of Rudy’s supporters said ‘He’s a strong and decisive leader’…Only 16% of McCain’s supporters said that…and a measly 8% of Romney’s supporters cited Mitt’s strong and decisive leadership.
Where Romney fared strongest is amongst those who vote based on the candidate’s positions on the issues, garnering 36%…18% McCain…just 12% Giuliani
“He’s a true conservative”…none of these three quite earn those credentials…9% McCain, 6% Romney, 5% Giuliani
Of the pragmatists…going with their candidate of choice because he has the best chance against a Dem…not surprisingly, Giuliani 10%, McCain 7%, Romney 6%
Perhaps the most surprising finding from this South Carolina poll..
Which ONE issue is most important to your vote? Abortion registered under 1%..not even registering in the stats in Romney or Giuliani’s totals..McCain came in with 1% citing abortion as most important to their vote.
Romney got strong support amongst those citing immigration, with 14%, in contrast to just 3% for immigration-friendly Giuliani and McCain.
Giuliani beats his opponents amongst those putting national/homeland security at the top of their list, with 9%…Romney 6%…McCain 3%….and fighting terrorism outside of Iraq…Rudy 6%, McCain 6%, Romney 3%
Social security comes in at 6% for both Giuliani and McCain, but a barely registerable 1% for Romney. What’s that about?
April 8th, 2007 at 4:56 pm
Good details Argo. A lot of those numbers are within the margin of error. Of course I liked this poll, because it had Romney gaining 9%, but in the end it’s just a poll. Perceptions of cadnidates are still in their infancy.
As JL said, there is plenty of wiggle room. Although each poll the undecided number goes down and the only gains and drops are with in the 1st tier.
April 8th, 2007 at 5:01 pm
Personally, I would like to see another SC poll. This is the first poll to my knowledge that’s shown anyone above McCain. Also, as Jason points out, last time Romney was at 5%. Not saying I don’t believe it, it’s just a pretty big shift from past polls.
April 8th, 2007 at 5:08 pm
LJ.
It’s a big jump, but it echoes the big jump he has had in NH a few days ago. But it does seem there is very little polling in South Carolina. Romney now is solid double digits in SC, IA, Michigan and NH. His campaign is definitely making a small surge.
April 8th, 2007 at 5:45 pm
This poll seems to run contrary to all of those who say that Rudy’s stand on
abortion is his achilles heel. It is satisfying to see that even voters in a
state like South Carolina seem to have their priorities in the right order when
it comes to the most important issues for this country.
April 8th, 2007 at 6:30 pm
Has Romney been heavily advertising in SC. The media has reported he has quite a high burn rate, presumably from advertising. This would explain his increased numbers as voters become more familiar with him.
April 8th, 2007 at 7:54 pm
“even voters in a
state like South Carolina seem to have their priorities in the right order”
DB, what is that supposed to mean?
April 8th, 2007 at 8:17 pm
This poll was down before Giuliani’s public funding of abortion disaster.
April 8th, 2007 at 9:34 pm
econ,
Giuliani may not have articulated his position in support of the Hyde Amendment as well as he could have in that CNN interview. However, he mitigated his mishandling of that question and improved his standing with pro-life conservative South Carolina voters by endorsing controversial legislation that would make South Carolina the first state in the nation to make it mandatory for pregnant women to view an ultrasound of their fetus before being allowed to proceed with an abortion.
April 8th, 2007 at 9:58 pm
Argo,
“Giuliani may not have articulated his position in support of the Hyde Amendment as well as he could have in that CNN interview”
Quite the understatement. The guy told everyone he thought the government should pay for abortions for poor women and that him appointing constructionist judges will not necessarily lead to the overturning of Roe! That was his only saving grace.
April 8th, 2007 at 10:30 pm
Jason,
Here are Giuliani’s comments on strict constructionists:
“A strict constructionist judge can come to either conclusion about Roe against Wade…They can look at it and say, ‘Wrongly decided thirty years ago, whatever it is, we’ll over turn it.’ Or they can look at it and say, ‘It has been the law for this period of time, therefore we are going to respect the precedent.’ Conservatives can come to that conclusion as well. I would leave it up to them. I would not have a litmus test on that.”
I believe the point Giuliani was making is that all strict constructionists view Roe as bad law. Some would seek to overturn it; correcting a legal mistake. Other strict constructionist judges, however, could just as well be deferential to longstanding precedent, and take a judicially minimalist approach, as Chief Justice Roberts advocated in his confirmation hearings.
It appears what you are seeking is more of a fundamentalist conservative justice who will act more as an activist, pursuing a socially conservative agenda; specifically, committed to overturning Roe.
April 8th, 2007 at 10:43 pm
Argo,
Right on point. In fact, many are seeking an activist justice who will overturn
Roe. You are correct that a strict constructionist may overturn Roe or recognize
it as legal precedent and therfore leave it stand. There is nothing non-conservative
about Rudy’s position.
April 8th, 2007 at 11:45 pm
Argo: I believe the point Giuliani was making is that all strict constructionists view Roe as bad law.
Heh. Giuliani claims to support strict constructionism. Quite strongly. Yet he also has said that he belives Roe was correctly decided, and is good constitutional law.
In any case, what his interview really did was to drive home the point that when Giuliani promises “strict constructionist judges”, that doesn’t mean nearly the same sort of thing as when Bush said it. Pro-lifers should take warning.
April 9th, 2007 at 1:44 am
murphy: “In any case, what his interview really did was to drive home the point that when Giuliani promises “strict constructionist judges”, that doesn’t mean nearly the same sort of thing as when Bush said it.”
If what you mean by that is he’s not speaking in code, promising with a wink and a nod to nominate only conservative activist justices with an agenda to overturn Roe, then you are correct.
As for your comment that Giuliani said he “believes Roe was correctly decided,” I would not call that an accurate characterization of Rudy’s thoughts on the ruling of the case. In February, Sean Hannity asked Giuliani straight up…’Is Roe bad law?’ Rudy responded, “I think that’s up to the Court to decide. It’s been precedent for a very, very long time. There are questions about the way it was decided, the basis for it. At this point, it’s precedent. It’s going to be very interesting to see what Chief Justice Roberts and what Justices Scalia and Alito do with it.”
That said, Rudy’s not exactly complaining that Roe remains the law of the land. And, while he sees Roe as flawed law, in his judgment, the ability of a woman to terminate a pregnancy should be a right, perhaps to the point of viability, when the rights of a developing fetus could arguably trump those of the pregnant woman. But, as a federalist, he does believe, in theory, the crafting of abortion laws should be the responsibility of each individual state legislature. Whether he’ll actually nominate justices likely to overturn Roe (provided he’s given the opportunity, of course) and empower states with the job of determining well-balanced abortion laws or ‘leave well enough alone’, as he seems content to do, remains to be seen.
April 9th, 2007 at 1:49 am
Many voters are turned off by Giuliani’s amateur handling of his gaffes. Why can’t he get his act together when he gets asked tough questions?
Pro-lifers are concerned about their issue but all GOP voters should be concerned about a candidate that is constantly screwing up.
April 9th, 2007 at 3:08 am
Wow, the breakdown on this poll renders insignificant so much of the blather on this blog and elsewhere about Rudy’s support being soft and abortion being a litmus issue.
April 9th, 2007 at 7:13 am
David,
Just remember this was done before Rudy’s foot in the mouth.
I can say for certain that in m state the consevative grass root leaders are not going to help out Giuliani.
April 9th, 2007 at 8:46 am
Jason,
I think you are living in an Internet bubble.
That’s just not reality.
I believe that you will see from the coming polls, that Rudy base support is not focused on abortion. They are much more concerned about stories like this:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,264864,00.html
We can’t afford to wait until 2012 to deal with this problem.
April 9th, 2007 at 8:48 am
TM,
Uh, actually that’s based on pretty solid sources on the ground.
Abortion may not be topic numero uno, but Rudy’s position on abortion is exact opposite of conservative principles.
April 9th, 2007 at 8:56 am
Jason,
Those “solid sources on the ground” who are going to put abortion ahead of national security, would never support Rudy.
April 9th, 2007 at 11:36 am
TM, we don’t have to put abortion ahead of national security. With any of the other top Republican hopefulls we get both issues; With Rudy we get one.
April 9th, 2007 at 11:49 am
Jason, Um, these assertions were being bandied about here far longer than 6 days ago. So now you’re in agreement with all the pro-Rudy arguments of a week ago? Great!
Regarding conservatives on the ground, how many quotes are you going to need to read from conservatives saying “I don’t agree with Rudy on X, but X is not so important right now, and he is the only candidate who can…” How many glowing words from editors at National Review, Weekly Standard, Ted Olson, Hannity, Rush, etc, can you ignore?
Of course NR slammed Rudy recently, and I applaud them for it. But notice they’re still open to him, have said great things about him, and will continue to.
What state do you live in?
April 9th, 2007 at 12:49 pm
Illinois, which is actually home to some very influential conservative leaders. The word is, and remeber I am state director of a conservative family grassroots organization with 300 people myself, there will be no one helping giuliani out from conservative coalitions.
April 9th, 2007 at 1:07 pm
Jason, “family grassroots” organization types are a subset of social conservatives, let alone conservatives overall.
I don’t believe you are an objective observer of politics.
April 9th, 2007 at 1:08 pm
“conservative coalitions”
What conservative coalitions? There are no conservative coalitions with any real money or support. All the 527 money is on the left.
This is what makes Rudy so unique, he can win without 527 money.
April 9th, 2007 at 1:46 pm
Argo,
Rudy said that Roe was correctly decided and called it good constitutional law during his Senate campaign against Hillary. That’s his statement I was refering to in my #15.
Rudy dodged the issue in your quote in #16. So what’s his current stance? Is it as he claims, where nothing in his view on abortion has changed, and he still belives Roe is good law? Or is this yet another instance of him being disingenuous (as in his PBA stance)?
April 9th, 2007 at 2:52 pm
Argo,
This is from Face the Nation on February 6th, 2000:
There you have it.
April 9th, 2007 at 3:17 pm
The Party will have to decide if it is willing to compromise on this issue, in order to defeat Hillary.
I suspect they will, due to the current national security threats.
April 9th, 2007 at 5:21 pm
murph,
While Giuliani failed to give a straightforward answer to Hannity’s question, I would not say that he ‘dodged the issue’.
The necessary follow-up questions that Sean didn’t ask in that interview, but could still be asked of Giuliani are:
1. Specifically, what do you call into question regarding the way Roe was decided?
2. Since you believe the decision whether to terminate a pregnancy or not is ultimately a woman’s right to determine, what do you find legally objectionable with respect to the basis by which the Supreme Court rendered its ruling in Roe?
3. At what point in the course of gestation and/or fetal development do you believe the rights of a pregnant woman are superseded by the fetus inside her?
LJ, all things relative, “pro-life” Romney is on far shakier, tenuous ground than Giuliani on the issue of abortion.
Those who have only heard snippets of Romney’s very recent conversion in the media and want more detail should read this expository piece from two months ago in The Weekly Standard:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Utilities/printer_preview.asp?idArticle=13222&R=113092AC68
Here are some of Romney’s quotes from 2002 that are cited in the article:
“I respect and will protect a woman’s right to choose. This choice is a deeply personal one. Women should be free to choose based on their own beliefs, not mine and not the government’s. The truth is no candidate in the governor’s race in either party would deny women abortion rights. So let’s end an argument that does not exist and stop these cynical and divisive attacks that are made only for political gain.”
“Believing in people is protecting their freedom to make their own life choices, even if their choice is different from yours. Accordingly, I respect and will fully protect a woman’s right to choose. That right is a deeply personal one, and the women of our state should make it based on their beliefs, not mine and not the government’s.”
“I am in favor of (embryonic) stem cell research. I will work and fight for stem cell research…I’d be happy to talk to [President Bush] about this, though I don’t know if I could budge him an inch.”
Even John McCain, whose self-professed pro-life status rarely goes challenged, has vacillated in the past decade on Roe.
He told the San Francisco Chronicle in 1999, “I’d love to see a point where it is irrelevant, and could be repealed because abortion is no longer necessary. But certainly in the short term, or even the long term, I would not support repeal of Roe v. Wade, which would then force X number of women in America to [undergo] illegal and dangerous operations.”
If there was a top-tier GOP candidate who maintained consistent pro-life credentials, then, and only then would it endanger Giuliani, McCain, or Romney’s chances amongst pro-life social conservative voters. At this point, it’s a non-issue, and that fact simply agitates and exasperates a sizable segment of the GOP base that has wielded immeasurable influence in shaping party’s platform since Reagan came into office.
April 9th, 2007 at 6:31 pm
Argo,
Of course he dodged it. Rudy was asked if he thought Roe was “bad law”. He answered a different question. Fact is, he thinks it’s “good law”, but at times he has the brains to hide it. Those followup questions about Rudy would be great. Really, the more opportunities this guy has to spout his pro-abortion-rights stances in front of the media, the better we will all see him for what he is. Enough of the “functionally pro-life” charade.
As for Romney being on shakier grounds than Giuliani, I couldn’t disagree more. The only issues where Rudy seems to take the pro-life stance (PBA and Hyde) are issues that he flipped on in the last few months. Furthermore, there was no explanation, only denials of his previous positions. It’s the very definition of changing your policy to suit an election. Romney, on the other hand, has been open and candid about his pro-life conversion in 2005. You may or may not believe him, but he points to a good reason for his change of belief. And by the way, even before 2005 Romney was never as pro-abortion rights as Giuliani is now.
The newspapers have been saturated with Romney’s pre-2005 abortion statements, and he makes a convincing case for why pro-lifers need to win MORE converts. Rudy, on the other hand, faces an electorate who for the most part don’t know he’s pro-abortion. The party has a history of electing previously pro-abortion candidates, but not current pro-abortionists.