Posted on 02/12/2016 4:48:29 AM PST by St_Thomas_Aquinas
So says Bill Kristol, citing "a political operative whom I've known a long time and whose integrity I trust" and who's currently working with an organization, presumably a Super PAC, in SC. Is this data credible? Well, when we're bearing down on a key vote and we're starving for numbers in a state that hasn't been surveyed by a major pollster in three weeks, let's just say it's credible enough for a post:
Here's what the pollster found:
Trump 32
Cruz 26
Rubio 20
Bush 10
Carson 7
Kasich 2
Rich Lowry is hearing of similar numbers in another private poll...
The last poll of South Carolina to place Cruz within single digits of Trump was in mid-December. His smallest lead in January was 14 points. If you're looking for a reason to believe this data, though, that's easy: Pre-Iowa polls of SC didn't reflect that Cruz is now, more or less, the choice of evangelical Republicans. It stands to reason that he'd creep upward towards Trump in a state like South Carolina where the GOP electorate has many born-again Christians. If you're looking for a reason to disbelieve, that's easy too: Trump was polling at an average of 36 percent in SC in January and now, coming off his blowout in New Hampshire, he's ...four points lower? If that's borne out by other polls of SC this week, it'll be strong evidence that Trump really does have a ceiling of around a third of the party even when he's got "momentum" from a big win.
(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...
“Facts are tough for Trump folks I know”
Especially for this one.
Trump’s negatives have fallen dramatically. Why? Because people have seen him with their own eyes by this point and have judged the man, not the MSM- created myth. In my own circle the “haters” have come around slowly but surely as they watch, listen, and learn. We can’t hire another politician to run this country. Period.
Sorry, but you're wrong again. The Iowa Caucus has correctly picked the last five Dems in a row, and was only "wrong" once in the last 19 years on the GOP side ('08 Huckabee). In 2012, Mitt and Santorum both got 24.6 pct... a difference of exactly 38 votes out of 120,000... not exactly "wrong".
Oh, i’m so wounded by that. Jackass.
And you literally cannot prove that he did lose votes. If you were rational you would understand the problem with your argument.
” That said, Cruz stole the election by stealing Carson’s voters just to eek out a win by 6 thousand votes.”
Really? You believe Cruz picked up 6,000 votes from Carson? Shouldn’t there be droves of “I changed my vote” stories all over the Internet that show that happened? Well there aren’t so that makes your statement a fraud.
“Sorry, but you’re wrong again. The Iowa Caucus has correctly picked the last five Dems in a row”
The fact that you have to lean on Democrats to prove your point, SHOULD HAVE CLUED YOU IN, that you point doesn’t apply to the GOP.
They have different rules for picking their candidates, so what does that have to do with this side?
“and was only “wrong” once in the last 19 years on the GOP side (’08 Huckabee). In 2012, Mitt and Santorum both got 24.6 pct... a difference of exactly 38 votes out of 120,000... not exactly “wrong”.”
Wrong once in 19 years on the GOP side?
Subtracting sitting presidents that were running UNOPPOSED, Iowa on the GOP side only picked one since 1980. OVER 30 YEARS.
Ok, so you didn’t invent it. You adopted it, instead of admitting you were wrong. Weasel.
In fact, I saw a story from a Carson precinct captain saying he was "very angry" with Carson, thinking he had dropped out, and his whole team going for Cruz.
I can report stories on the subject where Carson people reported being "angry" at Carson and moving to Cruz. Cruz only needed 4 people per caucus to do that. What I can't prove is "how many."
Actually they are helping Trump, Rubio and Bush by being snarky and rude, the more they can turn away from cruz the better this country is...we won't have this cruz person for president, of America anyways....
First off, the precinct chairman after precinct chairman reported (Fox news) that the speeches were over and the vote was in progress by the time of the drop-out rumor. Second, no news media that I'm aware of, has reported any voters who were persuaded to change their vote because of it and believe me they would LOVE to be able to report that. Third, Carson actually got MORE votes than it was predicted he would get. Fourth, it would have taken 25,000 more Carson votes to make a difference in the standing. How likely was that.
I'm decided to give you the benefit of the doubt and believe that you're just ignorant of the facts instead of plain out lying.
No, my candidate is gonna win. I’m fine, thanks.
It’s clear you’re deluded though, and are blind to the fact.
there you go, I asked for evidence of 6,000 votes and you give me anecdotal evidence of maybe 5.
There is no way whatever happened had only a minor influence, there just wasn’t time in the heat of the battle when rumors are everywhere.
And in any event, who truly believes Carson is in this to win? An effective rumor only exists if people believe it is likely true.
I haven't seen those numbers, but they could certainly be true... but if this new "poll" (pulled directly from Kristol's butt?) is correct, then it would seem to support my hypothesis.
Understood. It could easily be utter BS... but since it confirms my suspicions, I'll put some stock in it until the vote comes out.
Iowa also polled a Trump win that didn't happen in the caucus. This exact result has occurred in HALF of all the states so far!!!!! ;)
Sounds to me like the not-Trump Vote is substantial.
Cruz 26, just 6% behind Trump’s 32.
Where do the votes and more importantly the delegates go if these candidates are knocked out, to Trump or Cruz?
Rubio 20
Bush 10
Carson 7
Kasich 2
The danger of running high negatives and insulting the hell out of your own team is that you actually need them to win. Its hard to pick up support from people that you have been trashing.
Show us the stories. I'm somewhat of a political news addict and read almost EVERYTHING that's written every day during this season and haven see ANY reports like that.
I also find it interesting that Carson for all practical purposes DID drop out of the race because he didn't campaign in NH a single day up to the actual vote. He didn't even stay around for his post election party but headed to SC. And what's with his campaign bus driving around over the state empty? What's with that?
I've come to the conclusion that Dr. Carson is now in this to maximize his book sales. Remember he took off two weeks during the campaign for a book sales tour.
'96 Dole, '00 Bush, '12 (tie) Mitt... there's 3 in just the last 20 years, not unopposed. Nice try though. You DO know that this info is available online, don't you?
For first-hand reports at what happened at their own caucus locations, a number of Iowa FReepers have comments in the Iowa Forum, accessed via ‘Account’ and ‘My Location’.
The only ‘changed’ vote I have seen reported (by Politico) is one person who didn’t identify the Cruz campaign as the source for the Carson ‘news’, and who voted for Trump.
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.