Republican Iowa Caucus: Romney 25% Thompson 19% Huckabee 18%

Rasmusen Reports ^ | October 17, 2007 | Scott Rasmusen

[fluffdaddy]

As I scanned through the thread I didn’t see anyone mentioning the obvious explanation for the anomalous age and sex distribution of Fred’s supporters. Fred does better with younger voters and with men and less well with older voters and women. It just so happens that women rely more on television and less on the internet for political information than do men. Similarly, the younger a voter is the more likely he/she is to rely on the internet rather than television for the information that informs his/her voting decision.

Romney has been all over the airwaves in Iowa and you would expect his advertisement to have its greatest effect among women and older voters. Along comes a poll showing that he is particularly popular among women and older voters — hardly a surprise.

Thompson’s campaign has been largely internet based up to this point. One would expect his support to be strongest among men and younger voters — bingo.

The data probably won’t support any firm conclusions due to small sample bias. The number of voters in each category is probably too small to give meaningful results by category. Some age groups may have too many women and others too many men. But that said, I’ll bet what this poll is telling us is that Romney’s early TV presence has has given him an advantage with the remote control set that he can’t match with keyboard crowd.

The problem for Romney is that his TV advantage won’t last. By the time of the Iowa caucus all the major candidates will be more or less equally familiar to voters in every statistical category. Today’s polling data strongly suggests that when that happens, Mitt won’t be able to sustain his lead.

Mitt’s partisans should enjoy the Iowa lead while they can. It’s going south and when it does any hope Mitt has of winning the nomination is going with it.

[stephenjohnbanker]

Mitt will start sliding soon.

[COgamer]

“That is a big time disparity, that bodes ill for a GOP nominee. If GOP women are adverse to a GOP candidate, that candidate will be poison to the muddled moderate women needed to get to 51%”

Additionally, considering the fact that the Dem nominee is almost certain to be a woman, this gender-gap problem is only compounded.

[iowamark]

When only those who were absolutely certain they would vote, Romney attracts 24% support and leads [Thompson] by two.

In other words, Fred and Romney are tied in Iowa.

[ejonesie22]

Heh...

After all that money too.

Money can’t buy you love...

[Josh Painter]

o_zarkman44 wrote: “Maybe a Fred/Duncan ticket would be the ticket??”

I’m not seeing it. Polling at just 1%, Hunter would bring nothing to such a ticket. He doesn’thelp Fred. If he were leading in California, it would be a much different story, but Hunter doesn’t even show much strength in his own home state.

Hunter would make an excellent SECDEF in a Thompson administration, however.

[prairiebreeze]

Lie Number One: You really think the people of Iowa are going to be climbing all over themselves to support a guy who never made the effort to show up,never addressed them,

On the contrary Fred has been in IA at least on two separate occasions, made multiple stops during each where he presented speeches to and spoke with Iowegians. Perhaps there have been even more than that. Now remember, Fred has only been campaigning since Sept 6th before that testing the waters from around April. IOW he hasn't already worn out his welcome there like ol' Mutt has. And when Fred starts running ads there, Mutt will be one sunk ex-top tier.

Lie Number Two: who ducks out of interviews,

I don't recall reading any such occurrance in IA. Fred did cancel a stop in NH recently and so what? Scheduleing changes happen all the times with campaigns. The real lie would be to continue to pretend they haven't also happened at Mutt's campaign, because I can guarantee they have.

and is at best weak on social issues?

Laughable comment from a self-absorbed Mitt-wit. Fred's positions on abortion haven't done a 180 like your guy's have. And Fred's stance on gay marraige (and many other issues) is one of letting states decide (power to the people, ever heard of it??) and preventing judges from imposing social change through court rulings.

Probably the biggest lie of all: And the border?

Fred wants to utilize existing laws to secure the border and says this about illegals who are here:

I’ve pointed out that I don’t think that we have to have a choice between amnesty on the one hand, and trying to arrest everybody and put them on buses. Practically, that’s not going to happen. But you don’t have to choose between those if you can have attrition through enforcement, if we enforce the law with regard to employers - and we have an eligibility verification system out there that’s voluntary; it should be mandatory.”A superb collection of links compiled by perfect_rovian_storm give verifiable proof of Fred's votes on many immigration related issues.

So are there any other lies you'd like to state about Fred Thompson? This only took a couple of minutes and I'm just on my first cuppa.

courtesy ping p_r_s

[Josh Painter]

Fred needs a running mate who would help him gain support among women. I sugggest Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska - a conservative Republican woman.

[Josh Painter]

Plutarch wrote: “Thompson Men > Women by 2.3:1

That is a big time disparity, that bodes ill for a GOP nominee. If GOP women are adverse to a GOP candidate, that candidate will be poison to the muddled moderate women needed to get to 51%”

Good argument for a Fred Thompson - Sarah Palin ticket!

[perfect_rovian_storm]

Well done! :)

[perfect_rovian_storm]

#161 has it right. Fred isn’t registering with women because he hasn’t been advertising. Once he starts, we will likely see that change.

[NeoCaveman]

Thanks

[wilco200]

I’m not looking for jokes, I guess I’m looking for more decisive, confident answers/positions that reflect a determination to address a particular issue.

It seems to me that Thompson spends an awful lot of time waxing on about Federalism, blah, blah, blah. Sounds like he teaching US history 101.

I get it. I agree. Instead of talking constitutional theory, take some hard stands on issues - talk about how you are going to remove the federal government from education, healthcare, etc.

Take Rudy for example (would never vote for him) but when he talks about issues/threats surrounding 9/11 you can tell that he feels passionate about it and that he really would take it on.

On immigration, Tom Tancredo steps up and takes a passionate stance on the issue and you know that if he was elected that he would dbust his ass to make change.

With Thompson, I get this careless type vibe, and I think that if he were elected that the Dems would run rough shot over him and he would just fold.

[Jim Noble]

vote in your caucus/primary for a conservative that can win (Thompson).

So far, there's not much evidence that your proposition is true.

[fluffdaddy]

Sarah Palin for VPOTUS is a very interesting suggestion and not just because she is an attractive woman. One key to victory in November is to run against Washington. Fred got most of his political experience in DC. He had the sense to leave the Senate swamp after 8 years and he has had a few years to cleanse himself but it couldn’t hurt to make a dramatic statement that he represents a break with the status quo. You can’t get a lot further from DC than AK.

Picking Governor Palin as a running mate might be a political master stroke for Fred. She isn’t just outside the beltway she is completely outside the DC frame of reference. Her husband is a commercial fisherman. She has a son in the Army. She eats moose burgers, rides a snowmobile and has a lifetime membership in the NRA. Moving her into the Naval Observatory would be like Northern Exposure in reverse.

[redgirlinabluestate]

That is a very important point you’ve made that Republicans should ignore only at their own peril.

[Finny]

In other words, you want Thompson to act in a convincing manner -- i.e., with "passion." To my way of thinking, he already has acted convincingly, in his voting record with the senate, and in his words in written essays and video clips. I have learned to be indifferent to how "passionate" a candidate sounds. I am concerned with a candidate's philosophy and whether or not he can demonstrate that he has been true to that philosophy. I think that such things are much more concrete and meaningful than "passion," which is subjective at best, manipulative at worst.

[xjcsa]

I assume that’s from a national poll? It’s definitely not an Iowa poll, but you might want to specify what you’re posting.

[iowamark]

Money can buy a seat on the board of Staples but it cannot buy the Presidency.

Ask William Randolph Hearst, Nelson Rockefeller, George Romney, Henry Ross Perot, John Kerry...

[ejonesie22]

yup...