Posted on 06/11/2007 9:23:15 PM PDT by dangus
The Los Angeles Times article about the Bloomberg poll it sponsored highlighted the fact that Fred Thompson is only six points behind Rudy Giuliani in the race for the Republican presidential nomination. For those watching the nomination polls, that's encouraging but hardly shocking. But many other poll results are downright surprising.
For instance, the LA Times treats Republican-leaning independents as Republican primary voters, as if the rest of the nation followed California's relatively unique system of open primaries. But Giuliani leads among independents, 31-17. The category “Conservative Republicans” seems to track very closely to an estimate of the results of removing these independents from the pool of “Republican Primary Voters.” And Fred Thompson is leading among those voters, 26-24.
The real shocker from the poll is for John McCain. Late last year, McCain polled consistently in the range of 26-30%, good enough for 1st or 2nd place. He scored as high as 30% as late as January according to Time (when he led Giuliani, 30-26%), and as late as March according to ARG. The LA Times/Bloomberg poll shows McCain getting only 12% of the vote, even including “leaners.” On the other hand, a whopping 22% of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents would never vote for McCain.
Mitt Romney mustn't be pleased with only 10%, but he tends to score higher in polls that report only the most politically active respondents.
The poll results must also please Gingrich. He only gets 9% of the responses, but he's declared he's not even likely to run. What must be pleasing pleasing is that only 9% of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents would definitely not vote for him. And 46% of Americans approve of the job Gingrich, once a bete noir of politics, did as Speaker, while only 34% disapproved. In comparison, only 36% approve of Nancy Pelosi's performance, while 39% disapprove, 23% strongly so.
Republicans must take heart in this: Only 27% approve of the new Congress' performance, while 65% disapprove.
On the Democratic side, Hillary seems unstoppable. Among Democrats, she gets 40%, compared to Obama's 21%, Gore's 18%, Edward's 10%, Biden's 4% and Richardson's 1%. (Obama does better when Independents are included.
That's great news for Republicans, since she gets beaten by Giuliani (49-39), McCain (45-41), and even Romney (43-41), who suffers badly due to poor name recognition against all other candidates. McCain beats Edwards, 45-40, but Giuliani loses, 46-43, and Romney gets blown away, 46-32.
Source: http://www.latimes.com/media/acrobat/2007-06/30445335.pdf
You're right.
One more thing:
Newt Gingrich is going to hang around the fringes in order to jump in if Fred Thompson stumbles. Fred won’t, so Gingrich is going to stay out of it. Who wants to lie down in front of that freight train? He’ll start thinking about 2012, as well.
CNN’s village idiot Jack Cafferty on Fred Thompson:
javascript:void(window.open(’http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/news?ch=49799&cl=2943689&lang=en’,’playerWindow’,’width=793,height=608,scrollbars=no';));
Hillary, once she wins the Nomination, needs only to carry the states the Gore and Kerry won and 1 other... ANY one other... Like say the newly Democratic state of Ohio. She does not need to worry about winning even a majority of votes if she holds and has +1 state.
DO NOT UNDERESTIMATE THAT !!
Oh, and FYI... Wishy Washy Bush Like Republicans cannot win in Ohio... at least not til those poor saps come to their senses again... say 2012-ish ?
“......USA HATES ‘Rat Congress!”
Just who does the USA think elected the “Rat Congress?
Hint: It was the USA that elected them. Also what you sow, you also reap.
Could it be that in June ‘07 teaching the Republicans a lesson and sending President Bush a message in November ‘06 is not nearly as funny now as it was then?
Either way USA the Rat Congress is not nearly through with you.
“Hillary seems unstoppable. Among Democrats, she gets 40%, compared to Obama’s 21%, Gore’s 18%, Edward’s 10%, Biden’s 4% and Richardson’s 1%.”
On the other hand, 54% of rats are not voting for Hillary. If Hillary is the rat nominee, she’ll have trouble getting 40% of the vote in the general election. People just aren’t ready for a candidate who quotes Joseph Stalin, speaks black church rap and practices proctology to discern the mood of the voters.
I’m in total agreement with what you said; 100%. I could add more to it but no need to do so.
I agree with the premise but.......John Edwards? Especially when Hillary doesn’t beat them in the poll, how can John Edwards?
I’m going to try to offer to both of you some encouragement.
Let’s not forget: Lyndon Johnson was a most despised President because of Viet Nam. There were riots at the ‘68 Dem Convention in Chicago. AND YET, Hubert Humphrey, LBJ’s VEEP almost won the ‘68 election. The ONLY REASON he lost was because of the votes siphoned off by George Wallace.
Also, people despised Nixon, who resigned the Presidency over Watergate, and were madder than an old wet hen because Ford pardoned him. YET, Ford almost won over Jimmy Carter. Analyst say that had the campaign lasted one more week, Ford would have pulled it off.
>> Could it be that in June ‘07 teaching the Republicans a lesson and sending President Bush a message in November ‘06 is not nearly as funny now as it was then? <<
I’ll admit I was very concerned when the GOP lost Congress in ‘06. But I’m feeling much better now. :^D
You don’t win in politics by controlling the ball the most, you win by scoring touchdowns. Naturally, it’s hard to score if you don’t have the ball, but from ‘01 to ‘06, the Bush administration had been racking up nothing but safeties.
Better example: Jacques Chirac was the most hated man in France, with approval ratings in the single digits. Nicolas Sarkozy just led the same party to enormous supermajorities.
Or, in other words: if she wins the nomination, she’ll need to win EVERY state Kerry won, and still win more. 1 more? Only if it’s a megastate. Kerry was 18 short. Clinton could pick up New Mexico, Nevada, and Iowa and still fall short.
You can have a bet that more than half of America doesn’t even know who Edwards is and think it is some unknown Dem guy and hence the polls say he is popular than Rudy or Fred. It is just a outlier and a misleading poll as it is unlikely a one term below average Senator is that popular.
When paired against known Dems like Hillary and Obama, Repubs like Rudy and Mccain win and this shows on a Presidential election the repub front runners have better favourability ratings.
>> The key question is, where is Hillary gonna be from during the general election? The South (Arkansas), the North (New York), or the Midwest (Illinois). <<
Don’t forget: she gets all her support from the West (Hollywood, California).
What you are suggesting is the Republican candidate may lose by a surprisingly close margin, like Humphrey and Ford.
Those are good races, for comparison sake.
I'm willing to wager that Romney has never paid 400 bucks for a haircut.
He looks pretty coiffed. At a minimum, he uses a hairdresser and hairspray or gel--not a barber and water.
It’s darn well maintained hair, he just wouldn’t part with 400 bucks over it. He’s notoriously frugal.
Please don’t take my words out picking anc choosing which ones to make some inane point.
I clearly said GORE and Kerry... noting that some states favored Gore..
I also noted OHIO as the key state in contention.
That is the point. The GOP MUST CARRY OHIO... and I do not think that we can if we nominate a wishy washy Republican.
Now, if you care, address THAT point.
= )
>> I also noted OHIO as the key state in contention. <<
You said “She does not need to worry about winning even a majority of votes if she holds and has +1 state.” My point was that “holding” was no light task. If she wins Ohio, but looses even tiny New Hampshire, she loses. You sound like you’re ready to surrender defeat! Talk about “inane points!”
Incidentally, “the states Kerry and Gore won” means “every state carried by both Kerry and Gore,” not “every state carried by Kerry OR Gore.”
No; I was telling those guys not to give up just because the GOP has an unpopular Prez at this time. That is not the death knell for the GOP candidate in ‘08. Dubya’s negatives can be overcome and we can still win the White House in ‘08.
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.