GOP Nominee
Former Candidates
Here’s the daily Rasmussen:
Rasmussen Reports National Republican Primary Daily Tracking Poll
- Rudy Giuliani 25%
- Fred Thompson 23%
- Mitt Romney 14%
- John McCain 9%
- Mike Huckabee 6%
Daily tracking results are from survey interviews conducted over four days ending last night. Each update includes approximately 600-650 Likely Republican Primary Voters. Margin of sampling error for each is +/- 4 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.
October 8th, 2007 at 11:11 am
So much for the Romney-bump…
October 8th, 2007 at 11:12 am
The Thompson lead was fun while it lasted.
October 8th, 2007 at 11:13 am
rut-roh. It’s still a horserace.
October 8th, 2007 at 11:14 am
I posted the wrong numbers. It’s fixed now.
October 8th, 2007 at 11:17 am
In other Rasmussen news, Bush’s job approval rating sunk to 35% after he vetoed health care for poor childrens. I wonder what it will do to the general-election appeal of the Republicans now that they have all followed Bush off a cliff.
October 8th, 2007 at 11:18 am
Romney garnering 15% nationally, when he’s in single digits in a lot of states, leaves plenty of room for the 25-35% he needs in the 5 or 6 states that matter. This will be true even if he falls all the way down to 14% in tomorrow’s daily tracking poll. The rough order of magnitude of these numbers will change very slowly between now and January–and then they’ll change real sudden like.
October 8th, 2007 at 11:23 am
expect it all to change after the debate
October 8th, 2007 at 11:30 am
Grace, what’s your prediction about the debate?
October 8th, 2007 at 11:37 am
if it sticks to ecomanic issues I think Rudy will win going away, with McCain doing a Soild job and Huckabee working head to stand out with a more Populist Theme. Romney will have a hard time explaining his record. Fred is the wildcard. Will be vauge and will he talk about ideas like the one he mention about Social Sercurity.
Everyone else is everyone else.
Keys Gets Arrested.
October 8th, 2007 at 11:48 am
I give the debate to whoever goes after Chris Matthews and the liberal media
October 8th, 2007 at 11:49 am
Please, Romney has one of the best record on economic issues. He accomplished alot during a recession. Unlike his competitors who worked under the Tech Bubble.
But in all honesty, I think Fred will do the best in the debate, because he has the least to defend (nevermind he has the least to proud of). After Fred, Mitt will come out well. Look for Rudy to take the most arrows.
Rudy has defend himself for suing to keep the commuter tax. And he has to defend himself for suing to get rid of the line-item veto.
Huckabee has to defend himself on raising taxes across the board.
McCain has to defend himself from opposing the Bush tax cuts.
Romney has to defend himself from raising fees 250 million.
Fred has very little to defend himself.
October 8th, 2007 at 11:53 am
nowandlater: ‘Fred has very little to defend himself.’
That’s because he doesn’t have much of a record.
October 8th, 2007 at 11:53 am
Thompson has to defend his campaign and most succinctly: if it took him so long to decide something like just annoucning his run for president, than how long will it take for him to make a decision during something critical
October 8th, 2007 at 11:53 am
PaulV says: “if it sticks to ecomanic issues I think Rudy will win going away … Romney will have a hard time explaining his record”
If you have any influence with Rudy, please, please, please have him focus on economic issues. Lord knows, Romney has nothing to run on there. No career as an successful (to say the least) investor, no turnaround of a scandal ridden organization, no experience turning a multi-billion dollar governmental deficit into a multi-billion dollar surplus despite an overwhelmingly hostile legislature during a national economic downturn. Yes, by all means, please have Rudy stick to economic issues like his “wonderful” stewardship of New York City during one of the greatest national economic expansions we have seen which, by its nature, disproportionately positively affected NYC.
October 8th, 2007 at 12:02 pm
Oh please oh please don’t throw me in that briar patch!
October 8th, 2007 at 12:09 pm
Just curious if Romney was so wonderful, why couldn’t he present himself before the voters of Massachusetts for reelection. Unlike Romney, Rudy could actually get reelected by the people he served.
October 8th, 2007 at 12:29 pm
My predictions:
1. Giuliani’s numbers will go down after the debate
2. I will fall asleep while listening to Thompson
October 8th, 2007 at 12:32 pm
“Just curious if Romney was so wonderful, why couldn’t he present himself before the voters of Massachusetts for reelection”
Don’t expect rational behavior from Mass. They consistently reelect Teddy Kennedy the murdering drunk. Why would Romney want to serve those losers for 4 more years when he will be President instead?
October 8th, 2007 at 12:57 pm
Bethtopaz:
My predicitons: Thompson will use vague language without substance to answer questions and use endearing phrases like: “proof is in the pudding” and “don’t go all fussy on me now”.
Other predicitons: Romney will be aggressive because he has to do it now or forever hold his peace and Giuliani will be on the defensive. I’m sure there will be plenty of arrows for Romney as well. McCain will do fine, nothing more or nothing less. Huckabee will be interesting but not notable and if Ron Paul is there, great for comic relief.
Is there anyplace on the internet to watch it live tomorrow?
October 8th, 2007 at 1:02 pm
Jonathan, try to expand your horizon a bit, beyond the electibility of any candidate. I have not seen the number either way why Mitt may or may not win the reelection in Mass, but I know Mass is almost purely Democratic. Any conservative principle you practiced there will get you a black mark immediately. He refused to expand (nor shrink) the abortion rights, hence a black mark here. He refused to spend like crazy (or, as the Democrats would say, spending on worthy programs), hence another black mark. He fought the same-sex marriage all the way, hence other mark on his darkened page. Then, he fought for the rights of religions. Need I say what this has earned him? So yes, he may not be able to be re-elected, but it is because he stood (meaning, fought) for the conservative principles in the most liberal state. If you are a conservative in any way, you could at least appreciate his efforts rather than focusing on his electibility.
October 8th, 2007 at 1:12 pm
SGS: Than how did he get elected in the first place if he had such conservative positions?
October 8th, 2007 at 2:04 pm
Grace and Shawnie: Here are my debate predictions:
Hunter will stand sideways at the podium, looking very solid, expressing good, solid, conservative values, but he will go nowhere in the polls. I believe his time is yet to come - 2012 perhaps? I wish he would run for Governor of my State of California. It would be the perfect platform for him to run for POTUS.
Ron Paul will entertain and inspire those not entertained.
Tancredo will stand firm on immigration and sound whiney in the process.
Brownback will sound boring and be forgettable.
Huckabee will be delightful, full of energy and on the attack against Thompson. Expect the biggest punches in Thompson’s “political gut” to come from Huck. Huck is vying for the social conservative spot and is itching for a fight, since Thompson denied him the Lincoln/Douglas-style debate that FDT so profusely extolled (until Huckabee called his bluff). Huckabee reminds me of a puppy, jumping up and down and so anxious to play. I just want to pinch those dimpled cheeks when I see him. He won’t change much in the polls.
John McCain will huff and puff and try and blow that house down. I don’t think he has a chance in the nomination process, but no one has the heart to tell a war hero, and a real hero at that, the truth.
Thompson: If he doesn’t have a microscopic earpiece so that someone can “channel” him answers during the debate, will say, “Um … welp … yeah … things are pretty bad in Washington … politicians kickin’ the can down the road … uh, yeah … we, uh … have to keep on doin’ the things that work, and stop doing the things that don’t work … yesiree. Uh … well … I don’t remember that. Uh … yeah … that happened years ago and is, uh, ancient history. But, uh … yeah, I’m gonna fix that … someday … yup. Y’all see, I am not dancin’ to anyone’s tune. Yup.” I will not predict polls, but I just think that the more folks see this guy in action (or inaction) and here him talk, the less enamoured they will be with him. Just having Thompson on the stage will make Paul, Huckabee, Rudy and Romney look good. Heck, he’ll make all the rest of the guys look good and energetic.
Rudy Guiliani will come out fighting. He’s confident and will probably do well as long as he doesn’t mention 9/11 more than once and God forbid, doesn’t answer a phone call from his wife. Rudy, leave the cell phone in the dressing room! He will be outspoken about the liberal democrats (Hillary).
Romney - ah, Romney. What I hope for Romney is that he can be concise, humorous and not back down if attacked, and he will be attacked. Romney’s my guy and I hope and pray he comes out of this with his poll numbers going higher and higher.
October 8th, 2007 at 2:11 pm
Beth: Pardon me for asking but the moment that Hunter starts about trade, he loses all forms of conservativism. He is more protectionist than Dick Gephardt
October 8th, 2007 at 2:13 pm
#23, sorry I meant saying not asking
October 8th, 2007 at 2:27 pm
Oh, I’m not really that familiar with his positions - just read his bio on this site. Thanks for the heads up. As far as Huckabee, I think the problem with him, from what I’ve read, is that he’s not a solid fiscal conservative. Too bad. He seems like a good guy, but fiscal conservativism is very important to me. We have to move as far away from socialism as possible.
October 8th, 2007 at 3:01 pm
SGS,
Mitt would not have won re-election, but that was largely because the public reacted unfavorably to his frequent trips out of state, and his determination to run for president. Three previous Republican Mass governors had fled the state, and they have a bit of a sore spot about it. His approval ratings inched above 50% during many periods of 06′. When the health care legislation passed. When he oversaw the repair of the Big Dig tunnel, and when he wonderfully shephered the state through it’s worst flooding in 50 years. Had he chosen to run for re-election, without any indication that he was planning to run for President in 08′ (i.e, without frequent out of state trips), there’s every indication he would have won, even though he governed more conservatively then the Mass electorate prefers.
October 8th, 2007 at 4:38 pm
22# Bethtopaz
LOL. I’m going to hold those candidates to your cue cards!
October 8th, 2007 at 5:21 pm
Matt (#26), thank you for the info. So, there it is, why he could not win the re-election. Umm… Matt, is 50% a good figure for a Mass governor?
And Jonathan (#21), (you or anyone, please do correct me if I am mistaken, as I am not from Mass.), was it not that Mass. was going through a serious fiscal crisis at that time, and Mitt pretty much ran on the single-issue platform of cleaning up the economy in the state, which he has accomplished? It was my understanding also that he pretty much was status quo on everything else, that at least, he won’t expand or reduce the social-related issues. However, when the social rights were expanded, He did fight them with everything he had. That to me sounds like a conservative, even though, I must admit it is a very narrow scope. Perhaps you have to be in such a liberal state.
October 8th, 2007 at 7:05 pm
SGS,
Low to mid 50’s is a fine figure for a Massachusetts Governor. It’s an especially fine figure for a Massachusetts Governor who’d been quite vocal about his opposition to gay marriage, and one who had a change of heart on all life related issues. I’d be surprised if “Coupe Deval” has a 50% approval rating currently, and he lines up with the Massachusetts electorate considerably more closely then Romney did. By the end of 2006, Romney’s approval rating was in the high 30’s, but again, this was largely a result of negative news stories in the Boston media about Romney’s presidential run, and his apparent willingness to simply “use” Massachusetts as a springboard to greater heights.
October 8th, 2007 at 9:28 pm
Matt, appreciate the information! You’re from Maryland, are not you? How do you know so much about Massachuesetts?