Posted on 10/08/2007 9:32:02 AM PDT by finnman69
The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Monday Rudy Giuliani back on top in the race for the Republican Presidential Nomination. Twenty-five percent (25%) of Likely Primary Voters say they will vote for the former Mayor of New York City while 23% support Fred Thompson. Mitt Romney is the top choice for 14% while John McCain slipped back into single digits at 9%. Mike Huckabee earns the vote from 6% (see recent daily numbers).
Polling over the past three weeks has shown a clear decline in support for Thompson, but it’s not clear that Fred is fizzling. As noted last week, the GOP race is getting murkier.
A recent commentary by Douglas Schoen helps explain why Rasmussen Reports shows a closer race for the nomination than some other polls that focus on interviews with all adults. Dick Morris also touches on this subject in a recent column.
In the race for the Democratic Presidential Nomination. Clinton attracts 42% support followed by Barack Obama at 26%. John Edwards is at 12% and Bill Richardson is a distant fourth with 4% support from Likely Democratic Primary Voters (see recent daily numbers). Obama’s support steadily declined from April through August, stabilized in September, and may have begun to turnaround this month. Clinton remains the frontrunner but the former First Lady’s nomination is not inevitable.
(Excerpt) Read more at rasmussenreports.com ...
now they are jockeying to see who gets to make speeches at the convention.
Imagine a kook like paul negotiating a prime time spot! The MSM will just salivate at his 9/11 conspiricy and kookoonomics.
Ron Paul is a spoiler. His only purpose is to undermine Republican efforts. Democrats are using Ron Paul to keep Republicans disorganized.
Rush had an excellent point on this “keep off game” with that partisan lunatic Waxman who has put his staffers on a witchhunt against all conservative radio shows.
The US taxpayer is paying for political attacks.
The “log” cabin republicans are attacking using romney’s prior statements he has disavowed. (much like using Reagans past status as a Democrat) Those of use who are paying attention, even if we don’t support Romney currently, know he currently does not espouse anti-christian (pro-homo), pro-guncontrol,or pro-abortion positions. It will take romeny precious time to deal with these homosexual moles who put out the unauthorized ad.
[for those in rio linda, it would be like a right to life group putting out an ad saying Guiliani is a prolife candidate who opposes abortion]
Aren't the poor people of Rio Linda downtrodden enough without you misleading them? The ads merely point out that Romney takes whatever stance is necessary to benefit him politically. He was pro-choice, pro-gay marriage, and anti-gun when he thought it could get him elected in MA. Then, he decided to run for President and all that (and whatever promises went with them) went out the window for his Presidential run. Check it out here: http://romneyfacts.com/redblue.php
Whether right or wrong there are many people in this nation, and many republicans too, who don't believe in defining morality for others except for the minimum basics required to live peacefully on the same planet.
Yes, I understand that the unborn need advocates as they cannot defend themselves. But there is no national consensus on that issue or many other social issues.
Federalism is AS MUCH as social conservatives will ever get. A return to the 10th amendment...overturning Roe...state-based marriage with no marriage-based tax breaks at the federal level etc. That's where the consensus lies with the rest of the GOP.
A country where pot is legal in California and abortion is 1st degree murder in Mississippi.
Wait a minute. You guys are listening to the DU types here paid to say things like . . . if such and such is nominated, I am through with the GOP. They will deserve to be destroyed.
Of course, we all know there is no GOP candidate. The people who choose the nominee are the voters, and they will do so after evaluating these candidate in the trial by fire.
You demonstrate organization by fundraising and having flawless campaign travel. You demonstrate knowledge of the issues by not screwing up in press conferences. You demonstrate depth and executive excellence with white papers from staff. After all the votes are in, the candidate who did all that best gets the votes and wins.
The party doesn’t choose him. The voters do. If the voters select someone you do not like, it is not THEIR fault. It is YOUR fault. YOU didn’t raise enough money for your candidate. YOU didn’t persuade enough voters to vote for your candidate. YOU didn’t provide sufficiently brilliant advice to his campaign.
Conservatives take responsibility for their own failures. When your candidate does not get nominated, the responsibility is yours. Then in the general election you vote AGAINST the leftward most leaning candidate in a manner best able to deny HER power.
(not a romney supporter here)
fair is fair.
The ads are SPECIFICLY implying these are his current positions and that he said those things TODAY not years ago.
The group that put it together is particularly dispicable. They are the entourage that protected/enabled mark foley. The purpose behind this ad is a low life political operative hit.
We must have honest debates about issues and positions. Such perverts have no place in any political discourse.
Well, fair enough. But his supporters seem to be awfully quick to throw out his past. I’m not a fan of the Log Cabin Republicans, but they are, in fact, a group that Mitt has previously received support from. Then, once his Presidential aspirations came to the forefront, he tossed them aside.
The ad, and it’s reason for being, illustrates the major problem with Mitt Romney. As the old saying goes, if she’s willing to cheat WITH you, you can be sure she’ll cheat ON you. That’s Mitt in a nutshell. Now that it’s advantageous for his own career to be calling for the FMA, he is. Lord knows what position he’ll feel is best if he were to be elected.
Then the ad should have said that specifically.
It was constructed and presented as if Romney himself approved the ad.
The lesson it teaches is that Romeny was right to toss the degenerates aside.
Then the ad should have said that specifically.
It was constructed and presented as if Romney himself approved the ad.
The lesson it teaches is that Romeny was right to toss the degenerates aside.
I’m more of the mind that he shouldn’t have jumped in bed with them in the first place. Not only is it gross, but you can get all kinds of cooties. :)
true, but that is the purpose of “bless me father for I have sinned....” and the response of “go forth and sin no more”.
The question becomes has a candidate changed views for political expediency or true belief?
We have to be allow for success in persuading a politician. Otherwise there would be no purpose for lobbyists or debates.
“I could see a Giuliani Huckabee ticket very easily happening.”
I seriously doubt that. I can’t see Huckabee making an alliance with Rudy the Rumpranger. They are 180 on moral issues like abortion and homosexuality.
Ghouliani, the “gag” candidate:
Anti-GUNS
Pro-ABORTION
Pro-GAY AGENDA
Well said!
Hey, Huckabee flat out told James Dobson, I aint gonna go third party, he knows the stakes are too high. So I could definitely see him team up if he thinks the GOP can pull it out against Hillary. He’s certainly running like he is keeping VP open as option.
oh, and that might be President Rumpranger to you next year
“Then in the general election you vote AGAINST the leftward most leaning candidate in a manner best able to deny HER power.”
Well said.
You don't seem to grasp the fact that electing a liberal of either party, especially if that liberal is a Republican, is damaging to conservatism.
We've got to the point now where many believe that the Republican sleazy, liberal, flip-flopper is somehow better than the Democratic version. But, really, there isn't any difference between Giuliani and Bill Clinton when he was running in 1992.
Liberalism is about to overtake the GOP with your help if you put Giuliani in office. That means NO conservative President for eight years. And, no chance of Republicans retaking Congress for, likely, a decade.
If Giuliani wins the nomination, the same idiots pushing this RINO will be begging for principled conservatives to save him from an election loss to Hillary. Lots of luck. I'll be enjoying see the RINO get crushed.
Stop right there. Therein lies the stupidity of you Liberal GOPers. It will NEVER happen that way - ask the Ford generation. The party was “pure” back then - strong on defense, fiscally Conservative, social Libertarian. They lost, lost big, lost again and again.
Reagan knew the winning formula. The problem is that you Liberal GOPers are purists, and would prefer the wilderness to the current alliance. You just want SoCons to be to the GOP what the African-Americans are to the Democrats.
I'm all for Federalism - which is why Rudy911 must be stopped. Rudy911 Has never, at any time in his life, EVER, demonstrated a respect for Federalism. He has been a practiced Statist, with no exceptions, since day one. We will absolutely NOTHING that looks ANYTHING like Federalism from a Rudy911 regime.
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.