The Candidates
Featured Archives
Let’s take another look at today’s ABC/Washington Post poll on the Republican race posted earlier by Aron.
As “CWOJackson” over on TheFort2.com has shown, something is very wrong here:
Q: Regardless of who you may support, who do you think is the strongest leader?
Rudy Giuliani 38% – Mike Huckabee 9%
Q: Regardless of who you may support, who do you think has the best chance of getting elected president in November 2008?
Rudy Giuliani 42% – Mike Huckabee 7%
Q: Regardless of who you may support, who do you think has the best experience to be president?
Rudy Giuliani 28% – Mike Huckabee 5%
Q: Regardless of who you may support, who do you trust most to handle the U.S. campaign against terrorism?
Rudy Giuliani 36% – Mike Huckabee 8%
Q: Regardless of who you may support, who do you trust most to handle the war in Iraq?
Rudy Giuliani 28% – Mike Huckabee 9%
Q: Regardless of who you may support, who do you trust most to handle the economy?
Rudy Giuliani 27% – Mike Huckabee 10%
Q: Who are you going to vote for?
Rudy Giuliani 25% – Mike Huckabee 19%
On the key issues, Rudy receives far and away the greatest vote of confidence among GOP voters, according to this poll, compared to Huckabee. Yet there’s only a 6% separation between the two on the overall question of whom those surveyed would vote for. This just doesn’t compute.
Huck’s surge is being credited by some, blamed by others, on evangelical voters finally coalescing around his candidancy. Are evangelicals responding emotionally to his candidacy? When asked who they have the most confidence in in regard to the key issues, Rudy wins, big time. But in a head-to-head, it’s more of a squeeker.
Can anyone explain the disconnect?
December 11th, 2007 at 9:50 pm
Nothing in the poll about social/moral issues. That’s the key. They tried tough-on-terror Bush and it didn’t work. Iraq and the WOT don’t matter to religious conservatives.
http://www.political-buzz.com/
December 11th, 2007 at 9:50 pm
“Can anyone explain the disconnect?”
Its the package candidate theory – the same reason I support Romney. Except for maybe one thing, Romney is not the best at anything, but he is the best “all-round” candidate.
December 11th, 2007 at 9:50 pm
Greg I’m sure you know the answer. Ask Huck supporters why they support him.
He simply is the guy that evangelicals have chosen to circle around. He’s not the best canidate for the job but that doesn’t matter nearly as much as if they’re voting for who their pastor would vote for. Just look at your own post–Rudy is much more qualified…does it matter to them? Nope
December 11th, 2007 at 9:50 pm
Greg, multi-way field vs. 2-man race. That’s why I’ve been saying Rudy would/will dominate when it becomes a 2-man race.
December 11th, 2007 at 9:51 pm
“Iraq and the WOT don’t matter to religious conservatives.”
Not true.
December 11th, 2007 at 9:51 pm
Matthew, actually there was a question about social issues. I just didn’t include it in my run-down of responses, because I wanted to show the questions on which Rudy was highly favored over Huckabee. But here’s the social issues question:
Regardless of who you may support, who do you trust most to handle social issues, such as abortion and gay civil unions?
Mike Huckabee 17%
Mitt Romney 16%
Rudy Giuliani 15%
John McCain 11%
Fred Thompson 11%
Huck wins, but it’s statistically insignificant. Romney is one point behind him; Rudy two points. Essentually, a toss-up.
December 11th, 2007 at 9:51 pm
Thank you for the REALITY CHECK, Greg! After the past several days, its been long overdue.
December 11th, 2007 at 9:56 pm
“Can anyone explain the disconnect?”
In their minds they know Giuliani will be the better President but in their hearts they want to believe when Huckabee implies that God has chosen him. Who wants to argue with God when he is campaigning.
December 11th, 2007 at 9:57 pm
This is sad. Social conservatives are willing to putt all other conservative issues aside and vote strictly on social issues. I say we don’t let them, and I’m supposed to be one of them.
There is more than one candidate that brings all three legs of the conservative stool to the table, so let’s choose one of them?
December 11th, 2007 at 9:57 pm
matthew wrote: “Nothing in the poll about social/moral issues.”
Poll respondents were asked:
Regardless of who you may support, who do you trust most to handle social issues, such as abortion and gay civil unions?
Mike Huckabee 17%
Mitt Romney 16%
Rudy Giuliani 15%
John McCain 11%
Fred Thompson 11%
December 11th, 2007 at 10:01 pm
I can do that too.
Rudy vs Mitt
Strong leader
38–11
Most likely elected
42–15
Experience
28-12
Trust on the War on Terror
36–7
Iraq
27–9
Economy
27–18
Immigration
22–9
Abortion
15–16
December 11th, 2007 at 10:03 pm
“There is more than one candidate that brings all three legs of the conservative stool to the table, so let’s choose one of them?”
Romney
Hunter
Thompson (sort of)
December 11th, 2007 at 10:06 pm
Another way to read #10 is to say 85% of respondents preferred a conservative to handle those issues.
I am therefore guessing Huckabee wins likeability. You see this on the dem side as well with Clinton scoring well on issues, but Obama winning on personal issues, including trust and likeability.
December 11th, 2007 at 10:07 pm
Romney (preferred)
Fred (entirely acceptable)
McCain (acceptable, especially when considering Huck and Rudy as the alternatives)
December 11th, 2007 at 10:08 pm
Which candidates have damaged their campaigns and credibility by stepping into the religious Conservatives stool?
December 11th, 2007 at 10:09 pm
Michael, if you average out the percentages on those questions, Romney ends up with a 12, which isn’t that far off from the 17 he got in the candidate poll. Average Huckabee’s percentages, and you get 6, which is very far removed from the 19 he got in the candidate poll – thus the disconnect.
December 11th, 2007 at 10:09 pm
“Which candidates have damaged their campaigns and credibility by stepping into the religious Conservatives stool?”
meaning what exactly?
December 11th, 2007 at 10:10 pm
Here are a few other poll questions that were not included on the front page post:
Regardless of who you may support, who do you think best understands the problems of people like you?
Rudy Giuliani 21%
Mike Huckabee 16%
John McCain 16%
Mitt Romney 10%
Fred Thompson 9%
Regardless of who you may support, who do you think best reflects the core values of the Republican Party?
John McCain 18%
Rudy Giuliani 16%
Mike Huckabee 16%
Mitt Romney 14%
Fred Thompson 13%
Regardless of who you may support, who do you think is the most honest and trustworthy?
John McCain 17%
Mike Huckabee 17%
Rudy Giuliani 16%
Mitt Romney 14%
Fred Thompson 9%
December 11th, 2007 at 10:11 pm
Opinionated, LOL!
December 11th, 2007 at 10:13 pm
ACT Blog
Meaning that pandering to the extreme religious Right has not worked.
December 11th, 2007 at 10:14 pm
Opinionated,
Re: #15
Do you think a political leader should or should not rely on his or her religious beliefs in making policy decisions?
Should 27%
Should Not 66%
Would you say you have a generally favorable or unfavorable opinion of the Mormon religion? Do you feel that way strongly or somewhat?
Favorable 42% (Strongly 8% / Somewhat 34%)
Unfavorable 39% (Strongly 14% / Somewhat 25%)
December 11th, 2007 at 10:14 pm
ACT, check out that SHOULD NOT.
And welcome to the real world.
December 11th, 2007 at 10:15 pm
BTW, that referenced our discussion on a previous thread.
December 11th, 2007 at 10:16 pm
“ACT Blog
Meaning that pandering to the extreme religious Right has not worked.”
Am I right in assuming you are talking about Romney?
December 11th, 2007 at 10:17 pm
“best reflects the core values of the Republican Party” is John McCain?
Why isn’t he higher in the polls.
#21, It seems evenly split.
December 11th, 2007 at 10:20 pm
Ok, now I am really confused after Aron’s updates (thanks).
Although interesting, its a bit disgusting to poll the favorability of mormonism. And one could even quibble with the poll deeming it a religion since that seems to be a question in people’s minds.
I have said before, our emotional development lags behind our technological development.
December 11th, 2007 at 10:57 pm
I think the disconnect suggests that, while people may respect Rudy, they just don’t like him very much (perhaps because of his personal foibles) and they’re willing to go to any remotely appealing alternative.
December 11th, 2007 at 11:07 pm
“This just doesn’t compute”
Dude. Giuliani is an unapologetic whoremonger who committed adultery in front of the WORLD and shamed his family! Even his kids don’t support his candidacy.
Get a clue.
December 12th, 2007 at 12:15 am
Wooh Miller,
There is a disconnect here.
Rasmussen survey of GOP voters show Rudy has a 68% approval rating. The next highest approval is 62%. So, your premise is totally wrong!!
December 12th, 2007 at 12:16 am
Hmmm…let’s take a stab here. Clearly the vast majority of evangelical “Republicans” vote based on religious affiliation rather than policy. I’ve said it time and again, the FAR Christian Right (which unfortunately comprises large pluralities in states like Iowa and S.C. and thus unduly influences the nomination) do NOT belong philosophically in the Republican Party.
Like liberals, evangelicals do not use their reason to make political and policy choices – unless you consider “would my pastor approve of this guy” to be a reasonable metric of political determination. Instead, they use the metric of “does this make me feel better about myself, or not?” Their own answers to the poll make clear that they do not perceive Huckabee to be anywhere near as qualified to GOVERN (rather than use the bully pulpit to make sexually-active unmarried folks feel bad) as the others.
The sad truth, though, is that a Republican would probably not be able to attain a majority without pandering to the far Christian Right. If we swapped them to the Dems, we’d get the young pro-abortion/gay-marriage liberals, and we all know that young people don’t vote.
December 12th, 2007 at 12:21 am
Sorry if that was exceedingly frank. But it gets really tiring tiptoe-ing through the tulips about this.
Everyone knows that most of the people supporting Huckabee are in it solely for some religious reason, rather than their opinion about the policital issues upon which the president has an actual chance to have an impact. They don’t care nearly as much about the role of their elected officials in the government as they do about the role of their elected officials in the CULTURE. This is a serious problem. Muslims have a similar problem. It’s not going well for them.
December 12th, 2007 at 5:35 am
#30, Michael– you are spouting the same errant garbage that the MSM says– that conservative Christians only vote based on Religion- and it just ain’t true. What IS true is that they look for morals and consistency of character– which is lacking among the top choices… until Huckabee came along. Some of them were going for Thompson (more because they’d been told that they were going to go for him, rather than because they actually liked and agreed with the guy), but once Huckabee has come forward, Giuliani’s out because of a lack of personal integrity. That is not a hate-the-sinner sort of reaction, but rather, it comes from the feeling that, “WOW- if he can’t even keep a promise to multiple wives, and even his kids don’t really want much to do with him, then why would I trust him to uphold any kind of promises he makes on the campaign trail”. And Romney’s out because of his personal lack of consistency– flip-flopping on virtually every issue he’s ever taken a stance on. All this business about Mormonism really has quite little to do with Romney’s lack of support. For me, and every other evangelical Christian I’ve talked to about it (which has been a LOT), Romney’s problem has everything to do with his lack of consistency and not much at all to do with his religion.
I wish MSM (and frankly, commentators like you, Michael) would quit mis-judging the values of so-cons. It ain’t about religion- it’s about consistency and personal integrity.
December 12th, 2007 at 5:39 am
In response to the post, though– the truth is that people haven’t yet been made familiar with Huckabee’s 10+ years of executive experience. Once they do, these answers will start to shift.
The biggest differences between Huckabee and Giuliani that matters to evangelicals? One keeps his word to his wife, the other has already left two in the dust. One has the support of his children, the other’s won’t go near the campaign. One comes across as fresh and honest and (whether or not you like everything he says) as someone who will shoot straight with you. The other one comes across as someone who has hidden liberal views but is trying to suddenly move towards the center.
That’s the problem with the “disconnect” as you call it… there are certain matters of personal integrity that questions were NOT asked about. And I would contend that once voters start being informed about Huckabee’s governing record and lauded experience in the executive branch, the answers to these questions will indeed start to shift as well.
~Jess @ Making Home
December 12th, 2007 at 8:37 am
32 – Would you like to apply the same logic to Huckabee that you express to Rudy? “WOW- if he can’t even keep his kid from stringing a dog up on a noose, slitting his throat and stoning the dog do death”……
December 12th, 2007 at 9:22 am
yes, i agree, once pepople are more aware of hucks years of tax hikes, ethical lapses, and begging illegal immigrants to coem to arkansas, I am sure these numbers will change. yes, i agree Jess.
December 12th, 2007 at 9:23 am
jess, your comment that evangelcals don’t vote purely on religions is ridiculous. many of them do, hence huck’s rise in the polls. look at him, besides on religious issues, he is a horrible conservative. he has positioned himself as God’s candidate and that is why the religious fervor all over the place.
December 12th, 2007 at 9:26 am
#34, No, that’s not the same logic. I’m not holding Rudy responsible for his children’s divorces or improprieties. I’m holding him responsible for his own improprieties, which even affect how his own children treat him. Big difference.
December 12th, 2007 at 12:29 pm
It’s simple: to many, a vote for Huckabee is not a vote for someone really qualified to be president, but more of a protest vote. A lot of Evangelicals just want to stick it to the establishment, as if to say, “If the Republican party can’t give me a credible Evangelical candidate, I’ll vote for a non-credible one as a protest vote.” Also, Many SoCons are tired of establishment, Washington-style politics and tired of compromising with FisCons. They are easily sucked into Huckabee’s message of “I’m one of you (pure Christians), let’s go battle non-Christians and corporate America.”
Personally, I think this attitude is selfish, exclusionary, and narrow-minded. Such an attitude would be a disaster for the conservative movement and for America. The best for America is someone strong on all conservative fronts, such as Romney, Thompson or McCain.