• Send FReep Mail to Unmarked Package to get [ON] or [OFF] the Mitt Romney Ping List •
Posted on 06/09/2007 6:21:18 AM PDT by Reaganesque
…from the First Read (note the eye-popping Romney internal poll, fwiw):
…don't assume that the $3 million or so that Giuliani and McCain save from not competing is somehow helpful for the later states. (What exactly does $3 million buy in California? Not much.) This decision was not about the calendar as it was about not giving Romney an opportunity for a major win this August. Don't over-read into this decision by both campaigns. Remember, Romney was spending endless amounts of money to win this straw poll.
Indeed, the Los Angeles Times sees the decision as about slowing down Romney. "The lack of top-tier competition could undercut a Romney victory, denying the former Massachusetts governor momentum from a win."
The Des Moines Register’s Yepsen: “The Ames straw poll has become a shake-down of candidates that, for some, has replaced the caucuses themselves as a test of viability.” But “that trial run is useful training for caucus night,” especially for Giuliani, who “is slow getting started in Iowa,” and “could use a little hustle.” “Romney’s win won’t count for much.”
By the way, we got our hands on an internal Romney Iowa poll from late May. That poll, taken a week ago, had Romney at 29%, Giuliani at 12%, Fred Thompson and Gingrich at 10% each, McCain at 9%, and Huckabee at 7%. This was a significant change from a March Romney poll, which had Giuliani at 24%, McCain at 17%, Gingrich and Romney at 15%, and Huckabee at 7%.
Yesterday, both the Giuliani and McCain campaigns announced they wouldn’t be participating in the Ames straw poll. The Des Moines Register: "No candidate in the straw poll's nearly 30 year history has bypassed the event and won the caucuses." But with three of the four front-runners out, this streak could be broken.
The New York Times sees the decision by Giuliani and McCain to skip the straw poll as having to do with the changing primary calendar. "Their decision was the clearest indication of how much the changing primary calendar is upending presidential politics this year, as candidates grapple with the prospect of huge primaries in crucial states like Florida on Jan. 29 and California, New York and Texas a week later."
But don't assume that the $3 million or so that Giuliani and McCain save from not competing is somehow helpful for the later states. (What exactly does $3 million buy in California? Not much.) This decision was not about the calendar as it was about not giving Romney an opportunity for a major win this August. Don't over-read into this decision by both campaigns. Remember, Romney was spending endless amounts of money to win this straw poll.
Indeed, the Los Angeles Times sees the decision as about slowing down Romney. "The lack of top-tier competition could undercut a Romney victory, denying the former Massachusetts governor momentum from a win."
The Des Moines Register’s Yepsen: “The Ames straw poll has become a shake-down of candidates that, for some, has replaced the caucuses themselves as a test of viability.” But “that trial run is useful training for caucus night,” especially for Giuliani, who “is slow getting started in Iowa,” and “could use a little hustle.” “Romney’s win won’t count for much.”
By the way, we got our hands on an internal Romney Iowa poll from late May. That poll, taken a week ago, had Romney at 29%, Giuliani at 12%, Fred Thompson and Gingrich at 10% each, McCain at 9%, and Huckabee at 7%. This was a significant change from a March Romney poll, which had Giuliani at 24%, McCain at 17%, Gingrich and Romney at 15%, and Huckabee at 7%.
Even the Reblicans in Iowa are Liberals. Reason for Mitt’s 29%
If they were liberals wouldn't Rooty be leading?
I don't live in Iowa so I don't know how they are there, but there's no 'R' candidate more Liberal than Rooty. So I would think Rooty would be leading if what you say is true about 'R' Iowans.
(not looking for an argument, just asking, that's all)
Look at it this way. This week Romeny wins the Iowa straw poll and the New Hampshire debate. Those two primaries are bellweathers and influence what comes after. He announced in Mass and Michigan, claiming a favorite son advantage. That’s some strategy. If he pulls it off, he wins for sure.
I'm a Republican, I'm in Iowa, and I'm **NOT** a liberal. And I support Romney. Duncan Hunter's not the only conservative in the race (and Fred's not a candidate).
"If my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle."
If they were really liberals, then they would be in the democrat party. If anything, the abundance of so-called "Reagan democrats" shows that Iowa voters are conservative at heart.
Yeah, I think you're right. Whomever wins those get a 'HUGH' boost. Which means Mitt's current low poll numbers now are sort of irrelevant.
It also means with Rooty skipping Iowa and the others he KNOWS he's in trouble. If he loses outright he's done for, dead as a door nail. But skipping them shows he knows he can't win any conservatives and he needs liberal RAT voters in Blue State open primaries.
I wish he'd go away or switch parties - he belongs with Hillary and the Silky Pony. And his '9/11 shtick' is getting as old and irritating as Kerry's "I was in Vietnam".
Not much of a bellweather in recent elections.
“Even the Reblicans in Iowa are Liberals. Reason for Mitt’s 29%”
“I’m a Republican, I’m in Iowa, and I’m **NOT** a liberal.”
Isn’t the internet great. You can’t BS your way around here.
I’d take the words of an Iowa Hawkeye over someone trying a content-free dig at Romney.
I’d take it that the McCain and Rudy circus acts are leaving Iowa precisely because the GOP Iowa voters *arent* liberals. Only real Republicans vote there, not like in New Hampshire where you can get crossover voters (how McCain won in 2000), or in California. Hawkeyes arent buyin Rudy’s NewYorkStyle liberalism on social issues, and are going to puke out McCain’s multiple big signature liberal ‘accomplishments’ - McCain-Feingold and McCain-Kennedy. The Rudy and McCain acts arent selling, so they are giving up.
Sign. of. Weakness.
Romney did not win that debate.
I suppose there are different verdicts on the NH debate. The focus group that Frank Luntz ran gave it to Romney. One thing is for sure. There are many people trying to break the mould, and no one knows what will work, in the end.
I'm a little skeptical of this poll. Everything else I'm reading says that Tommy Thompson has put together a pretty good organization in Iowa and is ahead of all of the other second tier candidates. I understand that those polls could be wrong as well, but I wonder why there is the difference.
Bill
Not with a chance being nominated, plus they like Mitt’s look
(and Fred’s not a candidate)
Quite true. But I'm not ready to jump ship from the Romney camp until I see enough of him in more situations to feel like I have a good feel for him. I'm definitely interested, but I'm a bit cautious. I saw him on Hannity and Colmes the other night and wasn't thoroughly impressed, but we'll see.
Romney did not win that debate.According to the experts George W. Bush didn't win any debates, and yet he translated his debate performances into votes.
I do live in Iowa and the very fact that Rudy and McCain pulled out this week is proof that we’re not liberals. Why does anyone think they pulled out—because they were afraid they were going to win? I don’t think so.
Thank you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.