Polls, Polls, Polls!
A bunch of new ones…
Zogby – Hillary by 12, Thompson by 1(!) over Giuliani…
Thompson also holds a one-point edge with Rasmussen…
…but Gallup has Rudy by 10 (and Hillary by 9)…
Translation: Hillary is still firmly in the driver’s seat, but the Republican nod is still up for grabs (and if you’re wondering, Romney placed no better than 12% support in any of these polls, still a very distant third at best…and Ron Paul got his best national showing yet with a whopping 3% in the Gallup Poll!)…
What of the poll that places all of the Republican candidates behind “None of the above”?
What of the polls that always place Giuliani over Clinton?
Giuliani, is leading Fred Thompson by 6 % in Flordia according to Mason Dixon, American Res. Group, and Quinnipiac all by 6%. While Fred Thompson is leading the rest of the G.O.P. in Alabama, Tennessee, South Carolina, according to Mason Dixon for what it’s worth.
All this tells me the two front runners are dead even and I am curious to see if Fred is going to continue to gain in the polls or level off.
I Just hope the Democrats Nominate Clinton, for she will be handing the keys to the White House and telling either Giuliani or Thompson ENJOY. So reguardless of who the Republicans decide on, one of these two men will be our next President if the Socialists are foolish enough to nominate Hillary Clinton, who’s doing a great job at killing her parties chances of winning back the White House.
Quite right, Fargus, yet another poll out today…the one you refer to is the AP/Ipsos, showing none of the above with 23% to Giuliani’s 21% (and Thompson at 19%)…
I say we should pretty much ignore Thompson’s numbers until he actually starts campaigning or joins a debate. Right now he essentially IS “none of the above”.
Also, Jake, you keep telling yourself that. I have a feeling that Hillary will be very surprising in 2008. She’s smarter than all the Republicans put together, she has a shockingly good grasp of facts and policy, and she’s actually quite charismatic. The hard-right Republican base isn’t going to vote for her (which Democrat would they vote for?), but I think independents will find themselves taking a second look. Especially if her competition ends up being either Thompson or Romney (Giuliani at least seems to be more than an empty suit and would give her a good run, although support for the war might be fatal by then).
Ryan, with regard to Thompson, definitely. Earlier, I thought his numbers were misleadingly low — as it’s become more likely and apparent that he’s going to run, people are becoming more likely to support him. Now his numbers are about as high as they’ll get — he may get a 5 point bounce or so when he actually does announce — but then people will start asking questions about him and, chances are, he’ll lose some of his appeal.
I also find it ironic that the Democrats are so much more pleased with their leading (announced) candidates than GOP voters are. When you compare the accomplishments of Giuliani, Romney and McCain (even though he’s essentially finished now) to those of Clinton, Obama and Edwards, there seems to be a greater likelihood that they would be able to get something done once in office. GOP voters may be less prone to agree with their leading candidates on every single issue, but they’ve shown in the past that they will probably be able to accomplish something GOP voters would like — unlike the Democrats who have only shown a propensity toward failure (Clinton and Edwards) or have displayed neither failure nor accomplishment (Obama).
I also look at McCain’s and Newt’s numbers, which together poll around 20-25%. Let’s face it. Neither of these candidates are going anywhere. Newt will announce any day now that he’s not going to run. And McCain’s campaign is in tatters. So, I’m curious to see who goes up as their numbers go down. The answer to that question will likely decide the nomination.
Jake, if not for the war, you’d be correct. The war may be too much baggage for any Republican candidate to overcome. In any other election cycle, Hillary is unelectable, and she knows it. This is her one good shot, and she’s going to make it count.
Aaron, those are good points. But, I think the general malaise of the Republican base creates a demand for higher quality candidates. See my earlier posts on this subject in the previous thread.
To add to my posting yesterday on the competitiveness of the Republicans top two leading candidates based on public opinion polling, this time by a Rasmussen Poll, it continues to show no matter who the G.O.P. nominates among the two leading Republicans at it’s Convention in 2008, why Hillary is in “Deep Yogurt” if the Republican Party is Smart Enough to nominate either one of their two front runners.
Note, the poll below sampled “ALL Voters” not just Republicans or Republican leaning Independents, so I would take this to mean not only is Fred Thompson Strong amony self identified Republicans, but that Clinton is so vulernable that she can’t even show a minor Majority in the polls even though the Republicans are so weak and by all counts should lose in 2008.
To date, this is certainly quite telling, of course it is based on the “Current Mood” of the public towards Hillary Rodam Clinton V. Fred Dalton Thompson and always has the potential to move around. The poll linked below will show all the specifics.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_2008_clinton_thompson_tied
Snicker.
Obama and Edwards have charisma. Bill Clinton certainly does. Not even Hillary! would say she does with a straight face.
There is no evidence either that Clinton is any smarter than Rudy or Fred, for instance. They were both successful lawyers. I know she went to Yale Law but her upbringing led her there, Rudy and Fred had more humble backgrounds and in their era, such people generally did not go to Yale or Harvard. Democrats who can put two sentences together are often considered “wonks” when they only talk good games. See Al Gore for instance. Thompson may be lazy but lazy, successful people are often very smart, that is how they can afford to be lazy.
Currently on Drudge. I’d supply a link, but it’s one of their flash stories, so it won’t stick around most likely.
Let me be the first to say that I’m against this kind of fishing expedition for both Democrats and Republicans. It looks like a witch hunt, and most of the time, the hunters end up looking worse than the prey. See my recent comments regarding Ken Starr and Patrick Fitzgerald.
Laugh if you want, Bob. I’ve listened to her and she’s obviously the smartest person in the race – or at least conveys intelligence with her clear grasp of policy. Whether Giuliani or Fred are smart actually doesn’t matter, in that the Republican base is pretty much dedicated to the idea that being smart is a bad thing. When Giuliani said to Ron Paul that he’d never heard of blowback he was deliberately pandering to a base that prides itself on anti-intellectual ignorance.
As for charisma, you’re not her target voter. The independents are who she needs and I think she comes across impressively if you give her a chance. I’m, of course, not an independent, but I can’t help it if my party has gone insane.
More bad news for Rudy:
http://time-blog.com/real_clear_politics/2007/07/new_fox_news_poll_1.html?xid=rss-rcp