Skip to comments.Giuliani 47% Clinton 44%; Clinton 48% Thompson 44%
Posted on 09/03/2007 9:21:17 AM PDT by Clintonfatigued
Survey of 800 Likely Voters August 27-28, 2007
Rudy Giuliani (R) vs. Hillary Clinton (D)
Rudy Giuliani (R) 47%
Hillary Clinton (D) 44%
Fred Thompson (R) vs. Hillary Clinton (D)
Fred Thompson (R) 44%
Hillary Clinton (D) 48%
Sign up for our weekly newsletter, and get updates emailed to you FREE!
Giuliani 47% Clinton 44%; Clinton 48% Thompson 44% Friday, August 31, 2007 Advertisment Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani leads New York Senator Hillary Clinton 47% to 44% in the latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey. A month ago, Giuliani enjoyed a seven-point edge.
In six polls conducted between November 2006 and April of this year, Giuliani was ahead of Clinton each time with margins ranging from two to nine points. The match-up between the frontrunners tightened from May to early July. During that stretch, the two candidates were within a point of each other four times. Clinton led by a single point in a July 10 survey, the only time all year shes topped Giuliani in a national poll.
However, the last two polls show Giuliani ahead once again.
The latest poll also shows Clinton leading former Tennessee Senator Fred Thompson 48% to 44%. Thompson, who will formally announce his candidacy next Thursday, has been closely matched with Clinton in six polls conducted since March. The candidates have been within one point of each other in three of the six polls while Clinton has enjoyed a 3 or 4 point lead in the others.
(Excerpt) Read more at rasmussenreports.com ...
There was an article in the NY Post about the support RG has from the religious groups and how it was surprisingly strong
Given that the margin of error is going to be about 4%, it looks like both matchups show statistical ties.
Fred Thompson hasn’t even announced and he’s running almost even. That’s very impressive on his part. When he enters, he may pull ahead, in spite of the political climate.
Rudy Giuliani also continues to show strength.
Here’s a related thread.
OK, liberals don’t like the idea of having to deal with Fred Thompson and are praying it’s Giuliani the GOP candidate...
Interestingly, someone who is relatively unknown and not even an announced candidate is within striking distance of HRC.
Considering Clinton’s negatives are close to 50%, I find these poll results to be incredible.
This election is going to come down to the wire, just like the last two.
But I think we have the advantage and will take the W against Hildabeast, just like the last two times.
The liberal tears that will be shed from losing 3 elections in a row will raise the sea level more than global warming could ever do. :)
Well isn’t that nice. Now can we have a state by state analysis please, since presidents are elected by the states individually, not collectively.
“Interestingly, someone who is relatively unknown and not even an announced candidate is within striking distance of HRC.”
The man is appealing from many standpoints.
I didn’t like his support for CFR but that is the only fault I find.
I simply cannot vote for a liberal Julie-Annie. If he represents what the Republican party wants, then I am without a party.
Fred Thompson (R) vs. Hillary Clinton (D)
Fred Thompson (R) 44%
Hillary Clinton (D) 48%
Since Thompson is not even a declared candidate, this does not look good for Clinton.
Rasmussen is marinated in bullsht...
Watch in the coming months how that transfers to Thompson. Julie will undergo a reverse metamorphosis -- from a butterfly to a worm.
Don’t worry, the Beast will get a third party candidate (Michael Blomberg or some such) to tip the balance toward her.
These results are pretty much on par with every single poll taken in the last couple months.
Hillary just isn’t that popular...
With a loss the dems will go from on top of the world to the “facing extinction” and “naval gazing” charges of the media. Especially they are considered strong favorites in the generic ballot.
“The liberal tears that will be shed from losing 3 elections in a row.” .............. “Losing” in liberal speak is “stolen”. They never lose elections, they always have them stolen. When their candidate wins an election (i.e.1992) with only 39% of the votes then it’s considered an overwhelming victory.
That’s the plan. You can count it.
Personally, I think it’s Ron Paul.
That is true. But no one has ever lost an election with such a wide discrepancy in the popular vote. Giuliani would win with these numbers - somehow - if he is the nominee. Clearly Fred is within striking range too.
All of the republican front running candidates are head and shoulders above any of the democrats. My preference is Romney at this point, but I could vote for any of them.
Hillary Clinton... Give me a brake. The woman is a bitter, cold, psychologically impaired bitch. You thought Stalin was bad?
Obama... What the hell has he done? Where the hell did he come from?
John Edwards...? Geoffrey Fieger is one of his biggest fans. That says it all.
Dennis Kucinich.... No comment necessary.
Conservatives need to unite and win in 2008. Remember, run like you’re 10 points behind.
Bozo the Clown is within striking distance of HRC. When the pedal hits the metal and human Americans actually go to vote in November 2008, they will not vote for Hillary Clinton for President of the United States. If she is the rat nominee, that election will be the most astonishing GOP landslide in history. No matter WHO the GOP candidate is.
Unless it's a credible, conservative Independent... it won't help her. Bloomberg would take votes from her.
I suspect that at this point Thompson and Giuliani get about the same electoral count in state by state polling. Most of the south and the west is going to be rather monolithic in opposing Hillary. Rudy gains a few points by not getting wiped as bad in New York, Pennsylvania, and California. Don’t get me wrong, I am sure Rudy is losing those states also, but not by as much.
Actually Rasmussen is themost accurate pollster.
Her highest number is 48%, and there is no way it can go above that. Too many people hate her. The other thing to consider is turnout. Her presence in the race guarantees massive Republican turnout and low Dem turnout. The only way she can possibly win is if there is a strong center-right third party candidate.
“I simply cannot vote for a liberal Julie-Annie. If he represents what the Republican party wants, then I am without a party.”
Fine then! If your going to do that then I’m going to vow not to vote for Fred, President Hillary Clinton be damned. Making my point is more important than what happens to this country (and those poor darn military people over there in Iraq).
At this stage, it is all pure name recognition. Once the Thompson campaign engages and gets their man in front of the people on a consistent basis, I suspect these numbers will change.
I have to admit, I relish the thought of a Fred and Hillary debate. Her nasally screech against his down home drawl and “common folk” speech patterns. The contrast will be delicious.
“If she is the rat nominee, that election will be the most astonishing GOP landslide in history. No matter WHO the GOP candidate is.”
I wish you were right. However, what I would be concerned about is Ohio and Florida. Those are the only two places that everything being equal, Hillary can literally steal.
I think the RATS believed that they could steal Ohio in 2004 and something went seriously wrong. It is the only way I could explain Bush being up by 118,000 votes and CNN not giving him the state while Bush was down by 11,000 in Wisconsin and they already gave it to Kerry.
The RATS are going to steal something. Question is what? My thought is Richardson as veep and they go after Virginia and New Mexico.
I just hope Fred doesn't have too many more "Miss Teenage South Carolina" momments like he did at the VFW. At least he'll get unlimited retakes for his campaign ads.
The point has already been made, Thompson is withing striking distance of HRC and this is without a formal announcement. I look forward to the coming days of the campaign when debates and townhall meetings start up. FDT will bury HRC she will be a footnote in history, the First Lady who became a senator and nothing else.
The Libs' agenda is to go to popular elections.
Now that's the line of the day! LOL!
Too bad you followed with the other silliness.
Exactly . I would suspect that there are many people who won't commit to someone who isn't in the race . If and when Thompson gets in , the whole dynamic of this Republican race will change dramatically .
There is a giant void not currently being filled , and Thompson appears to be the only one who can fill it, and go on to win the general .
Bloomie entering would be a Godsend to us.
No conservative or independent would vote for him, in fact they distain him, and that comes straight out of the pocket of (hillary!)
Your thinking is like saying that Nader would be bad for Bush.
Now if Bloomie was a real independent liber type like Perot, that would be one thing, but he is not. Far from it.
Exactly why (hillary!) will tag someone who can deliver one of those SW states, ala Richardson.
Of course, if she gets Ohio, the game is damn near lost and that is very possible.
The South is red. The NE & California are blue.
Go, go Rudy !
Actually, no dem did the last time either, but the MSM is not admitting that Florida is no longer a swing state anymore.
The gap here is getting larger, but Ohio may be trending towards blue.
As far as talk about landslides against (hillary!) that is whistling past the graveyard.
In the game, she has most of the advantages in 08, her foul personality aside.
That'd translate to an easy 'rat win once the dead cast their votes.
Bump! Go Fred Go!
Meanwhile, negatives or not, the 'Rats will come out in droves and vote for Hillary!, and the press will slobber and fawn all over her, enough to drag other sheeple along. I'm telling you, if we keep up the crap like we've been doing, fighting each other rather than the real enemy, we're going to get walloped, worse than in '06.
the most important part of all these numbers is the piaps losing!!!!
Well, we all have to do what we have to do.
Not surprising that you think he would be just making a show of not voting, and not based on principle. Any one who supports Giuliani isn’t a serious conservative, but is just playing the political party game.
Agreed. Are your comments directed at this site for shoving off the Rudy supporters?
BTW - If Hillary wins the nom, more anti Hillary types who normally might have stayed home (because voting is too hard) will get to the polls than lazy dims getting off their duffs and shlepping down the street.
Hillary as the dem candidate is a God send.
I’m a serious conservative. I’ll support Rudy if he gets the nomiation.
Wow, with only 14 months to go before the election, Fred might as well concede now. No chance he could make up 4% in that short a time. </sarc>