The Candidates
Featured Archives
InsiderAdvantage/Majority Opinion GOP South Carolina Primary
- Fred Thompson 21%
- Rudy Giuliani 16%
- John McCain 16%
- Mitt Romney 16%
- Mike Huckabee 11%
- Ron Paul 3%
- Sam Brownback 2%
- Duncan Hunter 2%
- No Opinion 13%
Survey of 1,281 likely Republican primary voters was conducted October 2-3. The margin of error is +/- 3 percentage points.
October 4th, 2007 at 7:32 pm
Wow!
October 4th, 2007 at 7:35 pm
[...] post by Aron Goldman and software by Elliott [...]
October 4th, 2007 at 7:37 pm
The thing is who knows, I say watch out of McCain wins NH because then he can build up a weeks worth of stream, win Michigan and SC before anyone nows it and without spending much money to do so.
October 4th, 2007 at 7:41 pm
I dunno – Romney has a 9% lead over McCain in NH, and is a native son in Michigan. If Romney wins IA and NH, without taking a lage inexplicable hit in MI, I have to think he wins the nomination.
October 4th, 2007 at 7:47 pm
I don’t know that a nine point lead is insurmountable, but Romney does have a better shot than McCain. I would say this shows
McCain maybe stills has a better shot than what a lot of people shot.
October 4th, 2007 at 7:53 pm
Once voters realize all of Romney’s flip flopping, they will switch to a different candidate.
October 4th, 2007 at 7:55 pm
McCain gets the nomination and I support a 3rd party. Even if its RON PAUL.
October 4th, 2007 at 7:59 pm
gop says, “Once voters realize all of Romney’s flip flopping, they will switch to a different candidate.”
I say: Ha! HA! HAHAHAHA!
Are you insane? The first thing any normal person hears about Romney is that his positions have changed. Thanks to the MSM for that. Once voters realize what kind of person he actually is, many switch to him. We are seeing this playing out in three consecutive SC polls that show Romney gaining ground.
October 4th, 2007 at 8:01 pm
Obviously nothing is insurmountable – look what has happened to Rudy’s lead in national polls, but, like you said, with strong leads in the first two states, a lead in Nevada, expected to win Wyoming, within the MoE in Michigan, only down by 5% in South Carolina, things are looking good for Romney.
October 4th, 2007 at 8:01 pm
I liked Romney until I learned that is not really conservative at all. Funny how his positions on issues have changed now that he is running for POTUS.
October 4th, 2007 at 8:02 pm
Interesting that Romney is starting to gain a little bit of traction in SC (I say a little, as this poll may be an outlier). He has started to advertise in SC hasn’t he?
McCain is undoubtedly still in this thing. A top showing in NH would shoot him up in Michigan & SC. He could still take this out (Clinton 92 style, get near the top in NH and then roll on)
October 4th, 2007 at 8:05 pm
“I liked Romney until I learned that is not really conservative at all. Funny how his positions on issues have changed now that he is running for POTUS.”
You would demonize a man for coming to support your viewpoint over a period of time? What is more important, what a person’s opinions were 12 years ago, or how he will govern as a President? Also, show me one thing about Romney’s governorship that you did not like (actions, not words, please).
October 4th, 2007 at 8:06 pm
Is the race ever wide open in the important early States. Very interesting!
October 4th, 2007 at 8:07 pm
Jaype – this is no outlier, ARG, Ramussen (?), and this one all confirm a Romney rise in SC – right when he starts showing ads there.
October 4th, 2007 at 8:11 pm
Where is Tommy on this one? Maybe with a little luck we’ll get him to endorse Romney over Fred before the end of the month. Sorry Tommy I used to like Fred a lot and he was #2 for me but after looking carefully at him and watching how he has handled many different things I think it is obvious he isn’t going anywhere but back to his DC suburb home and/or back to law and order.
Mitt is the best hope for conservatives in this race.
October 4th, 2007 at 8:14 pm
These numbers aren’t accurate. In the crosstabs of both SC and NH. Women register more republican voters than men, and blacks higher than other minorities. This doesn’t match the national trends.
October 4th, 2007 at 8:18 pm
Romney’s Actions:
1.supporting gay marriage
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53598
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/09/18/purported-pro-gay-rights-flyer-from-mitt-romneys-2002-campaign-surfaces/
2.supporting abortion
http://www.ontheissues.org/Governor/Mitt_Romney_Abortion.htm
3.Putting his dog on the roof of his car for a 12 hour drive
October 4th, 2007 at 8:20 pm
Me endorse Romney? Before Thompson’s even debated yet? Fat chance. I don’t hold Romney in a very high opinion at the moment(maybe a little of it has to do with dealing with the blasts at Thompson by Romney supporters on a daily basis), but it has to do with credibility to me. It’s really the little things that really bug me, like how some of FDT’s little things that bug some of you. For example, when a candidate rushes to condemn someone before the faccts have been released, I tend to be very turned off. When a candidate stands up to someone like Dobson, I tend to get excited because it shows me backbone.
I am open to him but he is not very high on my list right now. Thompson’s still running higher in the national polls, and there are enough conflicting state polls to not sway my opinion right now.
October 4th, 2007 at 8:25 pm
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/27_of_republicans_would_vote_for_pro_life_third_party_instead_of_giuliani
Is this worth a separate page? 27% prepared to support a 3rd party over Giuliani is pretty massive. And its not a dodgy pollster, its Rasmussen…
October 4th, 2007 at 8:29 pm
And in more bad news for Rudy, he now trails Hillary 51-43 in a head to head, while having higher unfavourables than her. 41% said they definitely will not vote for Hillary, while 44% said they definetly won’t vote for Rudy. (how bizarre is that!)
Hillary has really started to improve her image, and people are starting to move in her direction. Doesn’t bode well for the GOP.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2007/10/03/ST2007100302057.html?sid=ST2007100302057
October 4th, 2007 at 8:29 pm
old news – there was a post on it, but this big release of new polling sent it into the archives.
October 4th, 2007 at 8:30 pm
Ok, thanks
October 4th, 2007 at 8:31 pm
Jaype,
There is already a post and discussion on that poll further down on this site.
Bottom line, Rudy is unelectable.
October 4th, 2007 at 8:32 pm
Mind you, it might be archive (I’m just too slow!), but it still isn’t good for Rudy. His candidacy depends on the presumptions that:
a) social conservatives will back him over Hillary
b) he’s the only candidate who can beat Hillary.
Its a case of “I’ll be good on foreign and fiscal affairs, trust me on the rest cos I’ll be better than Hillary”. These two items undermine the two essential planks of his election strategy.
October 4th, 2007 at 8:34 pm
There is a long way to go until the general, so there is no gaurentee that Hillary will be in the lead once we get a clear idea of who the nominees are. I think the tightening race on the GOP side has confused voters. The part now lacks a face, and the race now lacks a clear leader.
Hopefully, however, this will dispell the motto that Giuliani is the only “electable candidate” – and convince voters to choose based on issues rather than electability. Maybe we will lose in 2008 – but I at least want a candidate who can set a positve path for the GOP in 2012 and later – in the White House or out of it.
October 4th, 2007 at 8:37 pm
Huckabee is steadily gaining ground. He has time and a lot of debates, but will he have the money?
McCain looks like a real live candidate again, and perhaps more people are coalescing around their second choice in the hopes that he is most electable. He’s got a money problem too though.
So something has got to give. Rudy has the taxpayer-funded-abortion-on-demand-while-marching-in-gay-rights-parades-and-cross-dressing-and-divorcing-and-philandering problem. Romney has the Mormon flip-flopper-former-Massachusetts-lib problem. McCain has the money and his-campaign-is-imploding problem, and Huckabee apparently can’t outraise Chris Dodd.
Maybe nobody will get the nomination.
Hmmmmm….. Duncan Hunter?
October 4th, 2007 at 8:40 pm
Problem with McCain though (and I do think he is back from the dead), if he is putting all his eggs in New Hampshire, and he gets blown out in Iowa (as it appears he will since he is already around 6% and apparently giving up), might his bad showing in Iowa kill everything he is building in New Hampshire?
October 4th, 2007 at 8:44 pm
Tommy #17, great post.
I feel like I might be able to support Thompson but there’s a lot right now that bugs me about him. I don’t care at all about folksyness, I care about exuding competence, leadership, and intelligence. Fred may very well be all of those things but he sure doesn’t show it which makes him look weak. That may work in the South but I think it would cost him the general election. So many of my liberal friends talk to me about how we can’t afford to elect another moron as president. Well they sure couldn’t say that about Romney. It also bugs me that Fred seems to take a slow and easy approach (especially compared to Mitt), which worries me that he’d take a slow and easy approach to the presidency. I don’t want a slow and easy president, I want a principled micro-manager.
So in the end, I guess we both have our “issues” but could probably end up supporting the other candidate if it came down to it.
BTW, one more thing to add–you referenced the Craig incident where Romney “rushed to condemn him”. For all you know, Romney had inside information on the matter, or discussed his actions with Craig personally. Don’t be so quick to judge. In any case, I was pleased with the response just as I was unhappy with the way the Vitter case was a non-issue.
October 4th, 2007 at 8:46 pm
Emtee (#27) Isn’t Craig a disgrace? Holding onto power like that, no wonder the GOP brand is in trouble.
October 4th, 2007 at 8:49 pm
MWS (#26) its hard to say isn’t it? McCain’s poor showing in Iowa didn’t harm him in 2000, and if he makes clear he’s not competing in Iowa then a poor showing won’t matter (expectations game). Unless someone steals the limelight (e.g. Huckabee gets 2nd or 3rd, and starts pinching late deciding votes in NH. Thats a possibility.
The other thing to remember is that it all depends on the Dem race. If Clinton smashes the field in Iowa, then she’s pretty much locked in the Dem nomination. So NH independents will flock to the NH race to “make a difference”. That would help McCain (and possibly Rudy) and harm Mitt, I think.
October 4th, 2007 at 8:50 pm
From the CBS article on the evening news (thanks Aron)
Unbelievable:
The New York Times presents a searing portrait of Fred Thompson’s lackluster performance on the campaign trail, with the worst damage done within the quotes attributed to the candidate.
“Can I have a round of applause?” Thompson is forced to ask a silent Iowan audience at the end of his 24 minutes of remarks. After a rustle of clapping and some laughter, he grumbles, “Well, I had to drag that out of you.”
Drag seems to be the operative word here. Iowans saw a “subdued, laconic candidate who spoke in a soft monotone, threw few elbows and displayed little drive to distinguish himself from opponents,” the Times reported. After he spoke recently, “stillness engulfed the room.”
It may be that Thompson doesn’t talk loud because he’s not too sure of what he’s talking about. In an interview with Kay Henderson of Radio Iowa on Monday, he referred to the “Soviet Union and China.” At the end of her blog post on the exchange, Henderson wrote, “No, I did not mistype. Thompson said Soviet Union rather than Russia.”
October 4th, 2007 at 8:54 pm
Here’s good quote from Fred Thompson (also from the evening reads)
“Our country is at a crossroads. And we’ve become the most blessed country in the history of the world, through the work and sacrifice of a lot of people, basically adhering to certain principles. We have a chance to pursue those, or we have a chance to take another direction which a lot of historians say is the direction that every major power ultimately takes; the fall of the Roman Empire and all the other great ones. And maybe we’re just in a declining phase now, and we’re going to continue on that inevitable path that will lead us to a different place than the kind of country we grew up in. I reject that notion with every fiber of my being. There’s a political force out there right now — the people we will be going up against next November — have a vision of a bigger government, more regulation, more spending of money that we don’t have and policies that will make us less secure and less prosperous than we’ve been in times past. Now that’s something we have to do something about. We have to do it by adhering to the principles that got us to where we are today in so many good respects. And we have to do it by nominating a common-sense conservative who can get elected in November.”
I like where Fred is going with this, a small minor wish: that the “principles” would be more specific. I’d like Fred to release a comprehensive strategy paper like Romney did.
October 4th, 2007 at 8:55 pm
FDT has work to do. Strong, hard, error-free, committed work.
Then he needs to keep it up for 4 months. Straight. Like the other candidates. Like a President would have to do…
October 4th, 2007 at 9:14 pm
JayPe,
Smart analysis in #29. I hadn’t considered how an early Hillary blowout might impact the Republican race. Last I saw, the top three Dems are pretty competitive in Iowa, but is Hillary wraps it up in NH or soon after, maybe that has an impact later, like in Michigan or South Carolina, or (at the latest) Super Duper Tuesday. The way things are going, I’d say the Democratic race is over before Super Duper Tuesday.
Then again, 3-4 months is a lifetime in politics, to paraphrase the old cliché.
October 4th, 2007 at 9:23 pm
#17 Tommy: I know exactly how you feel. In fact, my heart goes out to you every time I read
something negative or say something negative about Fred Thompson. I came to this site from
Free Republic where Fred Thompson reigned supreme and unquestioned. Rudy supporters were
getting banned and Romney supporters were being called “liberal trolls” (I was called that)
and other horrible, undeserved names.
I feel the same way about Thompson that you do about Romney. I don’t even bother
making comments on FR anymore. It’s become like a Junior High Restroom – complete
with nasty graffiti – over at Free Republic.
I didn’t know Fred Thompson from Adam – as I had never seen him on t.v. or in the movies.
So he was a “blank slate” for me.
So I started looking into him – I was open. I read comments he made about the Senate – how he couldn’t wait
to leave it.
I read that when he was running for the Senate, he said, “I’m not having any fun.” And that’s when
he decided to drive around in the red pick up truck.
Honestly, Tommy, he sounded like a lazy, spoiled brat to me. And he hasn’t done anything since
he entered the race, to convince me otherwise.
I want to support a candidate who wants to be president with every ounce of their being.
Not because they want power, like Hillary Clinton, but because they believe that they can
help make America become a better place and keep America closer to what our Founding Father envisioned
so many years ago.
If I saw that in Fred Thompson — that kind of energy, that kind of commitment, that kind of passion,
I would definitely give him a chance.
But it just seems like everything in him is screaming, “I’m not having fun!”
That is why I can’t support Fred Dalton Thompson.
October 4th, 2007 at 9:34 pm
Jaype (#29), yes, you are correct in that, once Hillary blasted down her competition (especially if she puts Obama on her ticket), all open primaries will see Democrats and Independents going over to Republican side and vote for the nominee most least likely to win against Hillary. I believe that Rudy is not it, because he is too comeptitive in many blue and purple states (NY, CA, NJ, to name a few). We have McCain with his implosion, but he does have a proved track in Senate. We may not love him, but we know what we can expect from him, and it won’t be too painful for us to vote for him (at least, there is no sign that he would cause the party to split). Many of the political pundits in the mainstream media does firmly stand by the national polls, so Mitt may be the man. He also has the labels that prevent the previous democratic nominees from winning — flip-flopper and a member of non-mainstream religion. Then, we have Bloomberg who is rumored to enter if both Hillary and Mitt win the nomination, which will help Hillary more than it will Mitt. However, Mitt so far has the most well-oiled machine of an organization of any Republican candidate, and I do not think Hillary wants to go up against him, especially with his deep pocket he is willing to use. That leaves Fred, which pretty much is still hazy at this point. His early signs of obtaining 80,000 supporters in about 3 months and 12.7 millions in 4 months are not something to sneer at. But he also is showing some weaknesses with organizing, be it with his team or his thought. So, at this time, it looks like either Fred or Mitt is the most likely candidate those Democrats will vote for in the open primaries, if it is a sweep-victory for Hillary.
October 4th, 2007 at 9:38 pm
I do not by the crap. They try that spin in 2000 agisnt McCain (Rush and others) that the dems voting for him and the Indies was because they fell in would loses to Gore.
October 4th, 2007 at 9:44 pm
I think everyone needs to give FDT time to get his legs. Its not easy for anyone to jump into a presidential race fully prepared (unless they are bionic like Hillary). Everyone stumbles and there are literally a million people waiting to point it out. Calling Russia the Soviet Union is no big deal to me, just as it was no big deal when Obama referred to the “president” of Canada. Its like when your mother calls you by your brother’s name. Of course she knows the difference. OTOH, FDT had better be prepared for Tuesday’s debate. One or two similar gaffes could become a narrative.
I hope some of the candidates are keeping campaign diaries. I was thinking how crazy it must be to wake up one morning to maybe a good poll and some positive news coverage and think, “I could be president.”
October 5th, 2007 at 1:26 am
Tommy,
“when a candidate rushes to condemn someone before the faccts have been released, I tend to be very turned off.”
If you’re talking about sen Craig, the man plead GUILTY. Any facts missing here? Do you really doubt the guy was looking for a ride in the men’s room? Come on. Just because the case has plausible deniability from a legal standpoint doesn’t mean Mitt has to act like a scum lawyer and play along. Craig IS disgusting. Mitt is a real man for standing up and ditching the public-bathroom-pervert. FDT wouldn’r even meet face to face to debate with Dobson. Maybe he’d rather go on Leno again. Mitt’s the man, not Fraidy Thompson.
October 5th, 2007 at 2:14 am
17:
“1.supporting gay marriage”
BS. The sources in the first article showed a shocking lack of respect for the rule of law. I’d say an unAmerican lack. That’s right. And that flyer says nothing about gay marriage, only rights – i.e. the right to be treated equally under the law. If you think equal treatment means gay marriage, you’ve bought the liberal framing of the issue hook, line and sinker.
“2.supporting abortion”
Reading the page you linked primarily presented his current anti-abortion stance. The only clear pro-choice comments on that page dated to his 1994 campaign. Romney has been very up front about his shift while governor, and all his actions on the issue in office have been on the side of life.
“3.Putting his dog on the roof of his car for a 12 hour drive.”
That actually endeared me more to him when I first read it. It sounded like something my own dad would do. It was very down to earth.
October 5th, 2007 at 8:29 am
Very good for romney. peoplee said south carolina was impossible for him. well, if second place is impossible, then that is fine by any romney supporter.
he is having some upward movemen there which is good for him.
also good for huckabee. if huckabee manages to climb higher, that would be very good for him. I would imagine it would have an impact on his numbers in iowa as well.
huck still hsa no chance of winning the nomination though. maybe vp, but i hope not.
October 5th, 2007 at 8:47 am
Romney in second place in South Carolina, only 5% off the lead?
But…but…MORMON!!!
October 5th, 2007 at 9:26 am
“Romney has been very up front about his shift while governor”
No thanks, I don’t want a shifty President.
October 5th, 2007 at 11:38 am
Jaype #33 -
Does the fact you’re having to give capaign advice to your candidate indicate that he’s perhaps not ready for primetime yet? I especially don’t understand your clinging to him when there’s obviously other more prepared, energetic, articulate and conservative candidates in the race.
GOP #44 –
I’d rather have a shifty predient than a shi**y one. Thanks.
October 5th, 2007 at 11:39 am
Crap. That should have read:
GOP #43 -
I’d rather have a shifty president than a shi**y one. Thanks.
October 5th, 2007 at 12:53 pm
Ok – Hillary would be my idea of a shi**y one!