Posted on 09/26/2007 6:06:33 PM PDT by Doofer
The Democrats are the ones debating in New Hampshire tonight, but there's some news on the Republican side out of the state today as well. The Associated Press passes along the results of the latest CNN-WMUR poll of New Hampshire adults who said they plan to vote in the state's Republican primary, and the news isn't good for Mitt Romney: He polls at 23 percent, down from 33 percent in July.
That's still good enough to put him in first, but not by much: Rudy Giuliani comes in at 22 percent and John McCain at 17 percent. With a margin of error of 5.5 percentage points in the poll, that means it's very much anyone's ballgame. As for the other candidates, Fred Thompson comes in at 12 percent and Newt Gingrich at 7 percent.
New Hampshire is considered relatively friendly ground for Romney, the former governor of neighboring Massachusetts. He is the only Republican to have run TV advertisements there, and he needs a strong showing in the early primary state if he hopes to create a sense of inevitability about his candidacy. But it looks like he's in a dogfight, and it won't help that the McCain campaign will be rolling out a statewide advertising campaign in the next few days
Anyone from the area have theories on why Romney is having trouble? I’m just curious since I thought his entire strategy was built on taking both Iowa and N.H. to create a strong sense of inevitability.
Once he starts campaigning there and they learn more about him he will swamp everybody else in New Hampshire, it is one of his greatest strong points, blah,blah,blah.
“the news isn’t good for Mitt Romney: He polls at 23 percent, down from 33 percent in July.”
“New Hampshire is considered relatively friendly ground for Romney, the former governor of neighboring Massachusetts. He is the only Republican to have run TV advertisements there, and he needs a strong showing in the early primary state if he hopes to create a sense of inevitability about his candidacy.”
>> to create a sense of inevitability about his candidacy
I get the feeling that more than one candidate may come out of NH (and IA) with a “strong sense of inevitability” about their candidacy.
But “inevitability” oughtn’t be confused with “invincibility”.
From the start Mitt has been trying to create that sense by buying straw polls. It started in 06 in Tennessee where he pretend to be surprised to come in second after Bill Frist. He paid for people to go there.
He does it in all the straw polls he competes in. He is building and illusion that is quickly disappearing.
Its just not going to work. Thank God.
The Thompson Effect .
And Fred hasn’t even visited the state yet, has he?
I'd say they got to know him.
Maybe, but I think people are starting to take a better look at the candidates and Romney is starting to wear thin on some in my opinion.
Mitt Romney, self-absorbed loser Republican.
I see nothing on the horizon but Fred Thompson, except the horrifying image of Hillary Clinton taking the oath of office.
IMO.
Fred's been in NH twice. First, in June before he announced, for a fundraiser for state reps. Then he visited again a couple of weeks ago, for 3 campaign stops.
I realize that this in a NH poll only. However, how come Fred leads in the Rasmussen poll & most other polls rate him low?
Is the Rasmussen poll wrong or do the others have a Liberal slant?
Thompson’s bounce is gone and he’s not cracking the top in the places where delegates are earned. Funding is going to dry up as a result. This is why we’re hearing less from him. No money.
It is money that defines inevitability. FR needs to get very serious about what has to be done to stop Guilliani after Thompson fades away.
Sure that strategy worked when you only had abc, cbs, and nbc, and before the Internet. Romney is a fool!
Perhaps those 2 electoral votes in NH really mean something but Romney is spending very heavily in Florida right now and he and rudy will fracture that particular type of voter, and Thompson may very well take Florida itself.
but you are right no matter who the eventual nominee is. We need to defeat (hillary!) but its going to be very difficult indeed.
Is the Rasmussen poll wrong or do the others have a Liberal slant?
The simple answer is that Rasmussen's numbers come from those he feels, because of the screening process he uses, are likely to vote were as the other polls are taken from registered voters whether or not these voters are likely participate in the primary process.
Having said that as we get closer to the primaries the other pollsters will begin tightening up their screening and their numbers will start to reflect Rasmussen's numbers if the previous election cycle or two are indicators.
Not from the area but I have to assume someone that has the state to themselves to campaign in and was governor right next door would do significantly better initially.
Now that voters are starting to pay attention and, other candidates are starting to flood the state; his advantage slips.
While we’re asking questions, does anyone believe that John McCain’s age, against someone like Obama, would not be a factor?
Actually, I think his age is a factor no matter who he might run against. He’s no Ronald Reagan.
NH fancies itself very politically “aware” but what that seems to really mean is that they go with whoever is the “frontrunner” or establishment candidate. Now that his money lead hasn’t translated into inevitability they are looking around a bit.
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.