Posted on 05/08/2007 5:38:58 AM PDT by traderrob6
Giuliani 25% McCain 17% Thompson 16%
The race for the Republican Presidential nomination is getting closer. Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani remains on top, but his lead has fallen to single digits.
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows Giuliani at 25%, eight points more than Arizona Senator John McCains 17%. Former Tennessee Senator Fred Thompson has not entered the race, but is just a single point behind McCain. Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney is at 12%, the only other candidate in double digits. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich remains in fifth place with 8% support.
(Excerpt) Read more at rasmussenreports.com ...
Still polling candidates that aren’t even running, I see....
These polls are the true indicators of the effect of last week’s debate. NOT the pundits, not the instant polls, not the online polls.
“Still polling candidates that arent even running, I see....”
When they’re polling at 16% and running a solid third it would be idiotic and completely disingenuous not to.
No, they call people on the phone. }:>P
First, Guiliani continues his slide (yay!) after his miserable debate performance. Unfortunate that he's still the leader, nevertheless, it is bearing out the predictions that the more the primary voters learn about Guiliani, the worse he's going to do.
Next, McCain and Romney seem to have trouble gaining any traction -- McCain still hangs around the upper teens in support, Romney at least seems to be hanging out near his high-water mark of 12%, probably as the result of a good debate performance, but still below the 14% of "undecided".
Thompson continues to slowly edge his way upward, looking to pull most of his support from Guiliani and "undecided". Still, the most recent showing isn't over the MOE from previous numbers, although it is his high-water mark.
What will get interesting is seeing where the support goes as various candidates drop out or lose significant support...
It must suck that your candidate gets beat by someone who isn't running.
What will be interesting is where Fred will draw his support from. My guess is that it will come 60% from Newt, Hunter, Brownback, 30% from Romney, and about 10% from McClame. I don't get the McClame supporters. I have yet to meet one this time out (I met one in 2000). But clearly they are a well-entrenched group, because the numbers don't move, up or down.
It must suck to be able to have nothing but an incorrect assumption as to who my candidate is or is not. Got any more aspects of my life you wanna dictate to me?
Who is your candiate then? You spend 70% of your posts bitching and whinning about Fred and other posts defending Romney.
I agree with your analysis. When Fred enters, it will be the end for Romney, who is pretending to be the conservative in the race. McCain will eventually blow up because of frustration over being stuck around 20%.
IMO, it will be between Rudy and Fred. I suspect Fred wins by a nose at the wire, and Rudy gracefully supports him, as does McCain, Newt and Romney. Maybe some of the Rudy haters out there will support him as VP candidate.
No candidate.
Assumptions are the mother of illogic, including yours.
I make socio-political and statistical observations.
Gee....I make ‘em about Fred and Romney...and Rudy...because they are the 3 in the news the most.
I make what you would think are negative comments about Fred (when they’re mearly simple observations) because nearly all that is posted on FR are positive fluff pieces about Fred.
...what you would call positive about Romney (when they’re mearly simple observations) becaue nearly all that’s posted here about Romney is negative anti-fluff.
...and Rudy’s a media-generated candidate that will crash once the media turns on him.
If you think making socio-political and statistical observations are “bitching and whining”....then you simply can’t handle political discussion.
Adult swim...all kids out of the pool.
My guess is that the bulk of his supporters are over 65.
All articles are Fred are posted, good, band and ugly. I have seen numerous Fred hit pieces including one today.
If you think making socio-political and statistical observations are bitching and whining....then you simply cant handle political discussion.
I can handle it just fine. What I find funny is you complain about Fred not raising money and debating but then are upset that he still does so well in the polls. You may not like Fred's strategery, but it is working just fine without all the help from the peanut gallery.
Yes...you’re FINALLY seeing a very few anti-Fred pieces....after weeks/months of pro-Fred fluff.....and daily attacks (some correct, some completely manufactured) on the 3 major candidates.
I don’t “complain” about Fred not raising money. I couldn’t care less if Fred raises the money he needs or not, but I will make the observation that it is a political necessessity that Fred is not doing right now.....and if you think that Fred doesn’t need the $$$$$ then you simply don’t understand population psychology...especially voting population psychology. Even Hillary will need the money and everyone pretty much knows who she is and what she stands for. The winner is going to have to make attack ads and defensive ads AND position ads.....except Fred, he’s magic and everybody knows him and everything he stands for.
I’m not “upset” at ANYthing because I don’t let politics, especially this far out, attach themselves to my feelings. I’ll leave the feeeeelings to the libs while I make the observation that pollsters are still including those not even in the running to point out how asinine early season polls are and how easily manipulated polls can be and ho wSOME polls are just pure BS based on their methodology...especially straw polls and internet polls and any other poll that doesn’t properly vet their sample to include only “likely primary voters”, based on past voting history. Good ole statistics...3rd form of lie.
Fred’s strategy isn’t working. I currently have 8 GOP primary voters that work within 20 feet of me and not one of them knew who Fred Thompson is when I asked, let alone a single one of his positions. THAT comes from ads that interrupt the regularly scheduled programs we as a People watch (’cause we surely aren’t watching politics) and those ads cost money, the money that Fred isn’t raising. Damn...there I go “complaining” again...it’s an observation...get over it.
The strategy of not fundraising and relying on the name recognition of a 5th-7th billing actor and 1 1/3 term Senator that relatively nobody knows is a losing strategy.
The strategy of waffling within 9 months of a primary being concluded...on whether or not to run for the highest office in the land is a losing strategy.
The strategy of not partaking in a debate, even a first and relatively inconsequential debate is a losing strategy.
...but tha’t OK, the magic Fred doesn’t need all that $$$, campaigning, and debating. He’s a clear shoe-in with a bunch of visits to TV shows that most people don’t watch.
As a matter of fact, I failed to correctly dismiss this poll for the hunk of statistical shi’ite it is. “National telephone surveys” are statistical BS in predicting how people will vote in elections that are not “national”....only state-by-state polls are relevant. AND, this poll is admittedly pre-debate. I’d expect more from the #2 polling agency in the country.
It may not be revelant to a particular state, but it is a very good indication how a candidate is doing. You can call this poll shi-ite if you wish, but Thompson is polling around 14-15% in all polls such as CNN, USA TODAY/Gallop and Quinnipiac. Don't worry, I doubt if Thompson will be calling you for advice anytime soon.
So Thompson is running third and hasn’t declared? Interesting.
Yes it is unless of course you’re an Electric Strawberry.
Why?
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.