GOP Nominee
Former Candidates
One thing I thought that I remembered about ARG is that they have been consistent, although many have disputed their results. A look at their trends show that their last poll in June had:
John McCain 23%
Rudy Giuliani 22%
Fred Thompson 19%
Mitt Romney 8%
Newt Gingrich 6%
Now, compare it to July:
Rudy Giuliani 28%
Fred Thompson 27%
John McCain 10%
Newt Gingrich 7%
Mitt Romney 7%
So, we have these trends:
Fred Thompson +8%
Rudy Giuliani +6%
Newt Gingrich +1%
Mitt Romney -1%
John McCain -13%
Rudy continues to draw well in South Carolina, while Thompson has gained the most support in the last month. McCain has plummeted, while Romney and Gingrich have had little movement in either direction.
July 31st, 2007 at 4:26 pm
But what does Fred actually stand for? Where is his platform? On his official website, all he’s got is an opinion about eminent domain, another about federalism, and his opinion on an immigration decision. I might actually bring myself to support a candidate like Fred if he actually stands for something I agree with and will be a hard worker in favor of those causes, but to date I can’t find any evidence of either. Until Fred decides to actually put together a competent platform and prove through action that he can execute that platform well, I’m sticking with Mitt Romney–someone who has a great conservative platform together, executive experience, and works tirelessly to meet his goals.
July 31st, 2007 at 4:36 pm
One of the mods should do a post on the recent Gallup Poll that came out today on issues and who’s most trusted.
On Iraq Rudy leads Hillary at 55-51, Mitt Romney is at 37
On Terrorism Rudy leads Hillary 69-55, Mitt is at 38
On the economy Clinton beats Rudy 61-60(a virtual tie), MItt is at 40
By party it’s even more stark
Republicans have 75% confidence in Rudy on Iraq vs 49 for Mitt, among independents, Rudy beats Mitt 52-31 and is close to Hillary at 52-55
The numbers are similar for other issues
If these numbers keep up, that’s very good news for Rudy
July 31st, 2007 at 4:47 pm
jim, I think polls like that are also a reflection of name recognition. Clinton has near universal name recognition. In the states where Romney is actually known, I think you’d find he’d do a lot better. When Romney gets attention right now, it’s rarely positive. As I said in another post, I really can’t wait until Romney starts to get the same level of positive attention from the MSM that Obama and Clinton today enjoy. I also think that if people could actually compare Romney and Clinton in a debate side-by-side, a lot would change.
To prove my point, an interesting follow-up question to ask would be “Why do you trust Hillary Clinton to do a better job than Romney on Iraq, or the economy, or whatever”. What kind of response would they get? Seriously, when it comes to keeping the economy in shape, could Hillary hold a candle to Romney or Giuliani? With these numbers you mentioned, it all comes down to perception right now, and that’s largely based on name recognition, not substance.
I can’t wait until people like FDT actually have to debate Governor Romney, where Americans can actually compare side-by-side rather than basing their opinions of star-power, name recognition, or “perceived issues” the candidates support. Most Americans right now probably have no idea what Romney’s platform even is. And I hope Americans actually pay attention because Romney really is impressive, not because of his looks or whatever, but because I think he means business for the platform he’s chosen, one that is solidly conservative.
July 31st, 2007 at 5:04 pm
I really can’t wait until Romney starts to get the same level of positive attention from the MSM that Obama and Clinton today enjoy.
Heh, I wish.
July 31st, 2007 at 5:06 pm
How many people even read Time magazine anymore? And that article in Time wasn’t exactly a glowing endorsement. And anytime Mitt gets an actual headline, it’s over something pathetic like “DoggyGate”. Why does Obama get headlines like “agent of change” despite the fact that Mitt has made the concept of change one of his key ideals and talks about it at nearly every campaign stop? Name recognition is still a big deal. The places where Mitt has name recognition, he actually does pretty well in: Iowa, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Michigan, etc.
July 31st, 2007 at 6:18 pm
MA?
I think Rudy was leading in a recent poll I saw there.
Mitt has no shot winning MA against any dem
And he did so well there, he had no shot winning reelection and the GOP in the state is in far worse shape after him than before him.
Mitt will NEVER get the positive press that Hillary or Obama gets, that’s just reality and it’s part of his problem.
People will never see Mitt debate Hillary or Obama because he’d have to be th enominee for that to happen.
As for wh ypeople trust Hillary more on Iraq and the Economy, how about:
Her uhsband was President for 8 yrs and we never got into any messes like Iraq. He’ll know what to do.
The economy was pretty good under Bill. I’d like that again.
Hillary is basically running as Bill’s 3rd term and everyone knows it, so it;s not why do they trust Hillary over Mitt, it’s why do they trust Bill over Mitt and there’s plenty of reasons.
July 31st, 2007 at 6:30 pm
“I really can’t wait until Romney starts to get the same level of positive attention from the MSM that Obama and Clinton today enjoy…”
Yeah, right. None of our guys will get positive MSM attention. Not even McCain, now.
July 31st, 2007 at 6:53 pm
With most states in the country, the GOP took major losses, not just MA. The GOP isn’t looking good in any of the Democratic-leaning states that sometimes vote for GOP governors. I don’t think that’s all the fault of Mitt Romney. Also, many were not happy with Mitt because he was too conservative for a state that is so liberal.
As for the economy doing well under Bill Clinton, did we forget that for a good part of his presidency, Republicans were in charge in the senate, and at the end of the Clinton presidency he basically dumped a recession on GWB? Besides, I think crediting a good economy to the president (like the good economy of the 90’s) is a huge mistake. Presidents get way too much credit for an economy performing well and way too much flack when it doesn’t perform well. Not to mention that many economists believe that presidents have little influence over the economy, the business cycle, etc.
July 31st, 2007 at 7:16 pm
“I really can’t wait until Romney starts to get the same level of positive attention from the MSM that Obama and Clinton today enjoy…�
I hate to give you a reality check, but I watched some of the Democratic debate, and in it one of the contestants cited that Hilary Clinton and Obama had received huge sums of money from MSM sources like the NY times. If the American people are shallow and vote on name recognition, we are in big trouble unless Guiliani runs, even though Mitt is the bomb.
July 31st, 2007 at 8:25 pm
McCains poll numbers have dropped big time in SC. Does anyone have any poll numbers for states that he was leading before his money problems? For example: WV, VT, RI, MO, VR and of course AZ.
July 31st, 2007 at 8:48 pm
While Mitt has done great so far in IA and NH, he really should give SC a break. His faith is an issue to many of there voters. I think that he should use those same funds and resources at NV or MI, while continueing his efforts in Florida as well. BTW, Im not terribly concerned about these national polls 6 months out of the primaries since so much will happen to change the #’s.
July 31st, 2007 at 8:54 pm
jim said this, for some reason,
“Hillary is basically running as Bill’s 3rd term and everyone knows it, so it;s not why do they trust Hillary over Mitt, it’s why do they trust Bill over Mitt and there’s plenty of reasons.”
Sorry, trust and Bill Clinton do not go together. There is no reason to trust Bill Clinton over Mitt Romney and if you honestly think there are plenty of reasons to trust Bill Clinton over Mitt…whoa…no comment. You have a lot of off the wall comments in your entry, but that one is ridiculous. You are suffering from amnesia, aren’t you. Supreme court? Monica Lewinsky? Ring any bells? I apologize for reminding some people of that, but some people need to be reminded.