A first(?) thread on 2008: McCain,Giuliani & the Republicans

A couple of recent analyses from Scott Rasmussen who can boast of a pretty good track record in accuracy in the most recent elections.

2008 Republican Presidential Primary
Giuliani 33% McCain 17% Gingrich 13%
February 27, 2007
Arizona Senator John McCain''s (R) support among Likely Republican Primary Voters has slipped to the lowest level ever recorded since Rasmussen Reports began tracking the race shortly after last November''s election. McCain is now the top pick for just 17% of Republicans. That''s down two points from a week ago, five points since mid-January and is barely half the level of support enjoyed by Republican frontrunner Rudy Giuliani.

For the second straight week, the former Mayor of New York attracts support from 33% of Likely Republican Primary Voters. The man dubbed America''s Mayor in the wake of 9/11 has seen his personal favorables rise back to the 70% level once again.
More good news for Giuliani last week came in a Rasmussen Reports poll showing him with a nine-point lead over the Democratic frontrunner, New York Senator Hillary Clinton.

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R) remains in third place, this week earning a 13% level of support in the poll. It is not clear that Gingrich is running. He has said he will not make a decision until at least September. Recently, Gingrich had nice things to say about Giuliani. Earlier in the process, he had positive words about Mitt Romney.
Trailing Gingrich is former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney (R) at 10%. Senator Sam Brownback (R) earns 3%, Senator Chuck Hagel (R) comes in at 2%, and former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee is just over the 1% mark.

Most voters in Republican Primaries are politically conservative. Among those who consider themselves Very Conservative, Giuliani attracts 24% of the vote, Gingrich 23% and McCain is the third choice at 19%.
Among those who are Somewhat Conservative, it''s Giuliani 34% McCain 15% and Gingrich 14%.

Self-identified moderates likely to participate in the Primary favor Giuliani over McCain 41% to 18%.

Rasmussen Reports releases updated polling data on the Republican nominating contest every Tuesday. Results for the Democrats are updated on Mondays. The current survey is based upon national telephone interviews with 546 Likely Republican Primary Voters conducted February 19-22, 2007.

LINK

2008 Democratic Presidential Primary
Clinton 37% Obama 26% Edwards 13%
February 26, 2007
This week, Rasmussen Reports dropped Al Gore from our list of contenders in polling on the Democratic Presidential nomination but it had little impact on the overall dynamic of the poll results.

Senator Hillary Clinton (D) remains in first place and now enjoys support from 37% of Likely Democratic Primary Voters nationwide. That''s up from 28% a week ago. The latest Rasmussen Reports Election 2008 poll shows Senator Barack Obama (D) still in second place, now with 26% support. Former Senator John Edwards (D) is now the top pick for 13%.

Clinton''s lead over Obama is a bit larger than it was in the previous two weeks, but a bit smaller than the two weeks before that.

In earlier polls, Gore consistently finished in fourth place with support near the 10% level. Now, New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson (D) is in fourth place with 4% support followed by Senator Joe Biden (D) at 3%.
Rasmussen Reports releases national polling data on the Democratic nomination process every Monday and on the Republican race each Tuesday. The current survey of 568 Likely Democratic Primary Voters was conducted February 19-22, 2007. The margin of sampling error was +/-4 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.

Former Iowa Governor Tom Vilsack (D) dropped out of the race last week. He was included in polling up to that point and failed to reach the 1% level of support. Senator Chris Dodd (D) also failed to reach the single point mark.

While Clinton is still the Democratic frontrunner, polling last week shows her nine-points behind the Republican frontrunner Rudy Giuliani. Obama and Edwards also trail the former Mayor of New York City, but both are more competitive with Giuliani than Clinton.

Clinton is viewed favorably by 52% of Americans, Obama by 50% and Edwards by 49%. Richards is less well known and a plurality has no opinion of him one way or the other. Thirty-five percent (35%) have a favorable opinion of New Mexico''s Governor while 27% hold an unfavorable view. See our summary of favorability ratings and general election match-up results for all Democratic and Republican candidates.

Despite the fact that the frontrunners in the Democratic Party are a woman and an African-American, 60% of voters believe that the Democrats will end up nominating a white male as their Presidential candidate in 2008. Eight-out-of-ten Americans say they are willing to vote for a woman Presidential candidate and a similar percentage say the same about an African-American candidate. However, in each case, just over 50% believe their peers are likely to do the same. There is a significant difference of opinion on these questions by age. Just a third of senior citizens believe their peers would vote for a woman or an African-American.
LINK

0 Replies

[url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/27/AR2007022701030.html]The Washington Post[/url] wrote:

In the Republican race, former New York mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani, who recently made clear his intentions to seek the presidency, has expanded his lead over Sen. John McCain of Arizona. Giuliani holds a 2 to 1 advantage over McCain among Republicans, according to the poll, more than tripling his margin of a month ago.

The principal reason was a shift among white evangelical Protestants, who now clearly favor Giuliani over McCain. Giuliani is doing well among this group of Americans despite his support of abortion rights and gay rights, two issues of great importance to religious conservatives. McCain opposes abortion rights.

Hmmmmm

0 Replies

OCCOM BILL wrote:

[url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/27/AR2007022701030.html]The Washington Post[/url] wrote:
In the Republican race, former New York mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani, who recently made clear his intentions to seek the presidency, has expanded his lead over Sen. John McCain of Arizona. Giuliani holds a 2 to 1 advantage over McCain among Republicans, according to the poll, more than tripling his margin of a month ago.

The principal reason was a shift among white evangelical Protestants, who now clearly favor Giuliani over McCain. Giuliani is doing well among this group of Americans despite his support of abortion rights and gay rights, two issues of great importance to religious conservatives. McCain opposes abortion rights.
Hmmmmm

Perhaps some future polling will help tease apart why this change has happened. But I don't see your thesis making sense here, bill, at least if that word "principal" above is accurate. It would seem to make more sense that any gains for Giuliani would come from everyone else supporting republicans IF greater chance to win the election was the factor because everyone else would have far less reason to withhold support from him than do the religious right (abortion, gay issues, marriages, etc). Unless that group is just SO intent on winning that most else doesn't matter, and then that becomes an interesting question as to why.

0 Replies

OCCOM BILL wrote:

[url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/27/AR2007022701030.html]The Washington Post[/url] wrote:
In the Republican race, former New York mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani, who recently made clear his intentions to seek the presidency, has expanded his lead over Sen. John McCain of Arizona. Giuliani holds a 2 to 1 advantage over McCain among Republicans, according to the poll, more than tripling his margin of a month ago.

The principal reason was a shift among white evangelical Protestants, who now clearly favor Giuliani over McCain. Giuliani is doing well among this group of Americans despite his support of abortion rights and gay rights, two issues of great importance to religious conservatives. McCain opposes abortion rights.
Hmmmmm

That was what I was trying to convey earlier Bill, and thanks for finding this. I think those counting on the religious right to reject somebody because of one or two issues may be in for a big surprise. Even conservative religious people are capable of choosing the best options among the choices they have and I don't know many, if any, conservatives who are fanatically single issue people.

I think they are far more likely to trust somebody they believe to be reasonable and authentic, even if they don't agree on every point, than they are likely to pick somebody who changes positions based on the polls.

0 Replies

Plasticity on fundamental issues isn't the hallmark of the religious right. What other group has been so consistently demanding that candidates answer up to lists of litmus questions and then actively subverted where those answers do not achieve some demanded level of compliance?

And if "authenticity" or refusal to abandon one's ideas/principals was actually the key here, you'd have them signing up with Planned Parenthood in record numbers.

0 Replies

From fount of truth and wisdom, Bob Novak...

Quote:

At the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), which is attracting right-wingers from across the nation to Washington this weekend, Citizens United will distribute a 23-page attack on McCain. "He's no Ronald Reagan," it begins, and concludes: "John McCain is not a conservative." (McCain is the only announced Republican presidential hopeful not scheduled to speak at CPAC.) Simultaneously, McCain operatives are putting out material that depicts Giuliani riding into City Hall on the shoulders of the New York Liberal Party as a throwback to the old Tammany Hall Democratic machine.

It is hardly too late for such negative campaigning to bring down Republican front-runners because of inadequate conservative credentials. At this point in the 2000 election cycle, Bush was far in front with about 45 percent in the polls, with Elizabeth Dole second at 29 percent. McCain was at a mere 3 percent, behind Dan Quayle and Steve Forbes, before making the run that nearly won the nomination. The GOP race for 2008 may still be open, considering the conservative void.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/28/AR2007022801816.html

This is the "long knives" segment of events that Joe referred to earlier. It seems likely there will be a lot of blood on the ground (and walls and ceiling) at the end of this merely because the target stabby points are so ripe to bursting. Earlier in the column, Novak does a little nod to Gingrich but omits note of Gingrich's own marriage/infidelity/cruelty to wife problems.

0 Replies

More bad news for McCain.

[url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/27/AR2007022701030.html]The Washington Post[/url] wrote:

With Clinton and Obama as possible barrier-breakers in this presidential campaign, Americans were asked how a candidate's race or sex would affect their vote. What the poll showed is that Americans indicated they were less likely to support a candidate older than 72 or a candidate who is a Mormon than a female or black candidate.

Those findings could affect McCain, who is 70, and Romney, who is a Mormon. Nearly six in 10 said they would be less likely to vote for someone older than 72, while three in 10 said they would be less likely to support a Mormon.

The Post-ABC News poll was conducted by telephone Feb. 22-25 among a random sample of 1,082 adults, including an oversample of African-Americans, for a total of 157 black respondents. The margin of sampling error for the poll was plus or minus three percentage points; it is higher for the sub-samples.

0 Replies

On another site I play around in some, this was posted from the Trinity United Church of Christ website. This is the church Barack Obama has attended for the last 20 years and presumably is a member.

Quote:

We are a congregation which is Unashamedly Black and Unapologetically Christian... Our roots in the Black religious experience and tradition are deep, lasting and permanent. We are an African people, and remain "true to our native land," the mother continent, the cradle of civilization. God has superintended our pilgrimage through the days of slavery, the days of segregation, and the long night of racism. It is God who gives us the strength and courage to continuously address injustice as a people, and as a congregation. We constantly affirm our trust in God through cultural expression of a Black worship service and ministries which address the Black Community.

Trinity United Church of Christ adopted the Black Value System written by the Manford Byrd Recognition Committee chaired by Vallmer Jordan in 1981. We believe in the following 12 precepts and covenantal statements. These Black Ethics must be taught and exemplified in homes, churches, nurseries and schools, wherever Blacks are gathered. They must reflect on the following concepts:

Commitment to God
Commitment to the Black Community
Commitment to the Black Family
Dedication to the Pursuit of Education
Dedication to the Pursuit of Excellence
Adherence to the Black Work Ethic
Commitment to Self-Discipline and Self-Respect
Disavowal of the Pursuit of "Middleclassness"
Pledge to make the fruits of all developing and acquired skills available to the Black Community
Pledge to Allocate Regularly, a Portion of Personal Resources for Strengthening and Supporting Black Institutions
Pledge allegiance to all Black leadership who espouse and embrace the Black Value System
Personal commitment to embracement of the Black Value System.
http://www.tucc.org/about.htm

Now while I have no problem with churches with primarily black membership--most of them are terrific--I've never seen race as policy in the church laid out quite this blatantly. And there are negative reactions to it.

At the other site, the member changed all the "black" designations to "white" and asked for member reactions to that.

If this kind of discussion becomes commonplace, and it looks like it might, I'm not sure if that will be a positive or negative for Obama. Those who pride themselves on not being racist will no doubt rush to his defense if it is perceived he is being attacked because of his race. Certainly nobody but the nutcases will have the nerve to attack Hillary because she is a woman. Most are even tiptoeing around the Mormon issue for Romney even though it has definitely become an issue. Maybe it's more politically correct to attack McCain because of his age and of course it's fine to attack Guliani on his personal life (even when the Clintons are off limits on that score.)

And maybe this illustrates that it isn't really the candidate's credentials that get him or her elected? If that is the case, then who has the edge?

0 Replies

Just had to note my nomination for quote of the week... from Shaquille O'Neil...

Quote:

"I'm like President Bush. You may not like me, you may not respect me, but you voted me in."

0 Replies

blatham wrote:

Just had to note my nomination for quote of the week... from Shaquille O'Neil...

Quote:
"I'm like President Bush. You may not like me, you may not respect me, but you voted me in."

Yeah, but then recently "The Big Aristotle" stood next to the executive dummy, looked into the camera as he shook his hand and said, "You're doing a great job, sir." (The Miami Heat was getting some kind of meaningless accolade from the idiot in chief.)

0 Replies

sozobe wrote:

blatham wrote:
Thomas wrote:
blatham wrote:
My supposition is that he represents authoritarian leadership far moreso than the other two or three options. And this is a community that really likes authoritarians.

As a strategist, would you recommend that he rename himself Giulialini?

There's a joke here (aside from my habit of spelling his name with the 'u' preceding the 'i') but I'm not sure what it is.

Mussolini, I think.

As usual, Sozobe thinks correctly.

To answer Blatham's original question, I prefer a different explanation than his. My supposition is that Giuliani represents someone who can beat Hillary Clinton fare moreso than the other Republican options. And the religious right is a community that really doesn't like Hillary Clinton.

0 Replies

Thomas wrote:

sozobe wrote:
blatham wrote:
Thomas wrote:
blatham wrote:
My supposition is that he represents authoritarian leadership far moreso than the other two or three options. And this is a community that really likes authoritarians.

As a strategist, would you recommend that he rename himself Giulialini?

There's a joke here (aside from my habit of spelling his name with the 'u' preceding the 'i') but I'm not sure what it is.

Mussolini, I think.

As usual, Sozobe thinks correctly.

To answer Blatham's original question, I prefer a different explanation than his. My supposition is that Giuliani represents someone who can beat Hillary Clinton fare moreso than the other Republican options. And the religious right is a community that really doesn't like Hillary Clinton.

Why can't it be that he shares more values with that segment of the electorate than the other candidates do?

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

Why can't it be that he shares more values with that segment of the electorate than the other candidates do?

I didn't say it can't.

0 Replies

snood wrote:

Yeah, but then recently "The Big Aristotle" stood next to the executive dummy, looked into the camera as he shook his hand and said, "You're doing a great job, sir." (The Miami Heat was getting some kind of meaningless accolade from the idiot in chief.)

Any chance he was being ironic? Seems unlikely, but would be a good hit if so. ("You're doing a great job, Brownie" et al.)

0 Replies

Thomas wrote:

sozobe wrote:
blatham wrote:
Thomas wrote:
blatham wrote:
My supposition is that he represents authoritarian leadership far moreso than the other two or three options. And this is a community that really likes authoritarians.

As a strategist, would you recommend that he rename himself Giulialini?

There's a joke here (aside from my habit of spelling his name with the 'u' preceding the 'i') but I'm not sure what it is.

Mussolini, I think.

As usual, Sozobe thinks correctly.

To answer Blatham's original question, I prefer a different explanation than his. My supposition is that Giuliani represents someone who can beat Hillary Clinton fare moreso than the other Republican options. And the religious right is a community that really doesn't like Hillary Clinton.

If that were the explanation, then had Hillary never advanced herself for candidacy, these folks would be happy with McCain? I seriously doubt that would be the case.

0 Replies

I think it's true for a section of that population, yes.

I think there are people who are lukewarm about any given Republican front-runner but are very, very emphatic about keeping Hillary OUT of the White House.

So in that case a vote is less for the Republican than against Hillary.

0 Replies

People vote against candidates regularly. Any election is a collection of people voting for a favored candidate and people voting against their opponent. I think in the case of Hillary, the number voting against would be significant.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

On another site I play around in some, this was posted from the Trinity United Church of Christ website. This is the church Barack Obama has attended for the last 20 years and presumably is a member.

I liked the way TNR's blog acerbically commented when this particular (non-)angle came up:

Quote:

NOTHING ON OBAMA:

The right must have absolutely no good opposition research on Barack Obama. Here was Sean Hannity last night, really scraping the bottom of the barrel:

You know, according to The Chicago Tribune, I'm trying to do a lot of research on this today. I haven't gotten a 100 percent definitive answer. But they report he's been an active member of Chicago's Trinity Unity Church of Christ for the last 20 years. And I went and I saw a web site, and if it's the same Trinity United, they have a list of their views on there which says, you know, commitment to God, commitment to the black community, commitment to the black family, adherence to the black work ethic. You know, it seems to be, you know, about--it seems divisive.
Pathetic. I've heard his middle name is "Hussein". Maybe they could try using that.

Also alwaus funny how, when a talking point comes up on the Fox talk shows, Townhall or the conservative blogs, you can be sure to see Foxfyre come up with it here a day or some later..

0 Replies

nimh wrote:

Foxfyre wrote:
On another site I play around in some, this was posted from the Trinity United Church of Christ website. This is the church Barack Obama has attended for the last 20 years and presumably is a member.

I liked the way TNR's blog acerbically commented when this particular (non-)angle came up:

Quote:
NOTHING ON OBAMA:

The right must have absolutely no good opposition research on Barack Obama. Here was Sean Hannity last night, really scraping the bottom of the barrel:

You know, according to The Chicago Tribune, I'm trying to do a lot of research on this today. I haven't gotten a 100 percent definitive answer. But they report he's been an active member of Chicago's Trinity Unity Church of Christ for the last 20 years. And I went and I saw a web site, and if it's the same Trinity United, they have a list of their views on there which says, you know, commitment to God, commitment to the black community, commitment to the black family, adherence to the black work ethic. You know, it seems to be, you know, about--it seems divisive.
Pathetic. I've heard his middle name is "Hussein". Maybe they could try using that.

Also alwaus funny how, when a talking point comes up on the Fox talk shows, Townhall or the conservative blogs, you can be sure to see Foxfyre come up with it here a day or some later..

I think it is funny how fixated you seem to be on Foxfyre lately. How about offering some comments on the content of the information for a change? The Mona Charen piece could be picked up on Drudge or from most major US newspapers. I don't know that I've seen anything about this on Fox News. And the 'conservative blog' has far more liberals than conservatives in it. I would give you a link to the other site I referenced, but that is not considered good form on A2K. If you can get past your snotty judgmentalism for a bit and want one, e-mail or PM me.

0 Replies

blatham wrote:

If that were the explanation, then had Hillary never advanced herself for candidacy, these folks would be happy with McCain? I seriously doubt that would be the case.

I'm not saying they would be happy, but I am saying they would be less unhappy with him.

0 Replies

A first(?) thread on 2008: McCain,Giuliani & the Republicans

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know