Posted on 01/14/2008 7:20:19 AM PST by jdm
Rasmussen has a somewhat more realistic picture of the Republican primary race than the New York Times/CBS poll that used a whopping 282 likely voters for its sample. McCain leads nationally by five points over Mike Huckabee, 24%-19%, while the rest of the field comes in a statistical tie for third place. However, the real news appears in the head-to-head matchup with Hillary Clinton, where the Democrat can't even muster 40% support:
A Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds John McCain leading Hillary Clinton nationally by double digits. The survey, conducted on the two nights following New Hampshire’s Primary, shows McCain attracting 49% of the vote nationwide while Clinton earns 38%.
Among Republican voters, McCain leads 86% to 6%. However, among Democrats, Clinton’s lead is a slightly less dominant 74% to 18%. McCain leads by twenty-one points among unaffiliated voters.
This is the third straight poll showing McCain ahead of Clinton. In December, the Arizona Senator led by six points. In November, he held a narrow two-point edge.
The crosstabs have some eye-raising data for the Clinton campaign. Clinton loses women to McCain by four points and men by 19. Clinton loses the youth vote by 23 points, a rather amazing number, and only wins the 50-64 vote by a single point while losing all other age demographics.
Hillary scores strongly among blacks, but McCain holds 19%, which would almost double the support given to the Republican ticket in the 2004 election. McCain garners two-thirds of the Other ethnic demographic, presumably competitive among the Hispanic voters.
It's easy to consider this an anomaly based on enthusiasm after the New Hampshire win, but as Rasmussen points out, this trend started two months ago. As McCain strengthened among Republicans, he has strengthened against Hillary. Huckabee also has come out ahead of Hillary in this polling, 45%-42%, the first time that has happened all year. That appears to indicate that Huckabee and McCain have gained credibility from their early wins, while Hillary has gained none from her New Hampshire victory.
The Republicans may see some hope for the general election after all, and Hillary and the Democrats have some turbulence ahead of them. If they keep offering the message of non-specific change, they may lose another presidential cycle they should have won.
Fred has to win SC. if he can’t even win SC, there’s no way he can win anywhere else
I don’t think McCain’s support is any ‘stronger’ today than it was in 2000. Its driven by the MSM and ‘crossover votes’ just as it was eight years ago.
When the time comes in November, those votes simply won’t be there.
the polls were right about the republicans
and they would be there for Huck, Rudy, Romney and Fred?
Vote for Fred. First of all, the more support he gets, the more he gets noticed. Second, SC is sort of do-or-die for him - he's put a lot of time, money and effort into SC, and if he doesn't do well then a lot of people will write him off. This can only help McStain, as many of Fred's more national defense-oriented supporters will look to someone with strong credentials in that area.
Second, the fewer votes that Gomer Huckster gets in the deep South, the faster he'll implode. When he does, then a LOT of his voters will go to Fred.
McStain won't, IMHO, get the nomination - he's torched the base too many times. He's actually less of a danger than Huckster, simply because Huckster takes almost directly from Fred. Without Huckster, Fred would be far ahead of where he is right now.
Not true.
Giuliani does not do well in head-to-heads. Your liberal Mitt does horribly when matched against Democrats nationally or in state polls.
The fact is that McCain is relatively honest for a politician and he holds great appeal for independents, which makes him highly electable.
Romney is seen as a slimy used car salesman with his finger in the wind and his eyes on the polls, and thus is very strongly disliked by independents despite his stances favoring gun control and manmade global warming and universal health care. And thus Romney is highly UNELECTABLE. There's no way he can win with the middle hating him and the right (correctly) suspicious of him.
‘and they would be there for Huck, Rudy, Romney and Fred?’
They aren’t being propped up by crossover votes, so its a moot point.
Uh, Excuse Me! I have not yet voted.
Uh, THIRD.
More MSM and pollsters trying to influence our choice of a nominee. They keep beating the same drum, i.e., McCain is electable, therefore he should be our nominee. Forget that his nomination will destroy the GOP and his pro-amnesty policies along with the same position held by Obama and Clinton will end this country as we know it.
If all the people who said they want Thompson to win would actually vote for him and quit talking about “voting” or not “voting” for him to eliminate another candidate, he would win by a landslide.
At least by my bias FreeRepublic poll. I for one am definitely giving my vote to Thompson.
Romney is a cross between the “I’ll say whatever it takes to win the nomination” from hillary and the prettyboy “oh I messed my hair” aspect of John Edwards.
I want to vote for fred but not sure he’ll still be in the race by the time I get to vote in the NY primary.
Huck might. because we will really lose if he’s our guy
282 is probably the total number of Republicans working for CBS and the New York Times.
I’m in Ohio......so I’m waiting till March and praying for his name to still be on the ballot.
I’m in Ohio......so I’m waiting till March and praying for his name to still be on the ballot.
Not me, I will NEVER vote for McCain
Let’s put Hillary and Obama in a tank.
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.