Meta-Blog

SEARCH QandO

Email:
Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock
MichaelW

BLOGROLL QandO

 
 
Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
 
 
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News
Politics
Business
Science
Technology
Health
Entertainment
Sports
Opinion/Editorial

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict

Blogging

Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links

Regional

Regional News

Publications

News Publications

 
Huckabee: Leading in Iowa?
Posted by: McQ on Wednesday, November 28, 2007

Okay, I can't help it ... this is delicious:
The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of the Iowa caucus finds former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee with 28% of the vote, former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney with 25% support, and everyone else far behind. National frontrunner Rudy Giuliani gets just 12% of the vote in Iowa at this time while former Tennessee Senator Fred Thompson is the only other candidate in double digits at 11%.
How screwed up is the Republican field? Let me count the ways. Huckabee has gained 12 points since the previous Rasmussen poll earlier in the month. Why?
Among those likely to take part in the Iowa Republican caucuses, Romney is viewed favorably by 77%, Huckabee by 76%, Giuliani by 68%, and Thompson by 71%. Those numbers reflect an eleven point-gain for Huckabee and a six-point decline for Giuliani while impressions of the other candidates is essentially unchanged.

As for unfavorables, just 20% offer a negative assessment of Huckabee. Twenty-one percent (21%) have an unfavorable opinion of Romney, 24% say the same about Thompson, and 30% have a negative opinion of Giuliani.
A 17 point swing vs. Giuliani. And much lower negatives? So why hasn't Mitt been able to cash in on the apparent discontent Iowans have with Giuliani?

This is getting more and more interesting all the time (and as a reminder, per Rasmussen polling, Romney still enjoys a strong lead in NH).
 
TrackBacks
Return to Main Blog Page
 
 

Previous Comments to this Post 

Comments
Rudy is basically ignoring Iowa though. Losing Iowa or even NH probably won’t hurt him as he’ll do well in the heavily populated states I think.
 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
I’d sum up all the reports I see about the GOP race in one phrase: it’s wide open.

But I find it particularly hard to believe that Huckabee is the one who will break out of the pack.
 
Written By: Billy Hollis
URL: http://
I am not so sure that Romney is as popular with midwesterners after they get to know him as more "comfortable" personalities like Fred and Huck. In other words, Mitt does not wear quite as well with them.

He is wholesome, but almost too perfect for farm folk.
 
Written By: vnjagvet
URL: http://www.yargb.blogspot.com
With the Dems ain a virtual statistical tie (we really need to defeat Hillary in Iowa and get it over with) with next store neighbor candidate Obama from Illinois surging at the right time as well as Mike Huckabee making it a horse race with Mitt Romney on the Republican side, you have to expect even more fluctuation in polling numbers over the next month. I love the Iowa Caucus, it is really a lot more fun (being a native Iowan, I have participated in it many times) than a primary because you really get to have more influence when participating in a caucus. For those of you unfamiliar with the Caucus process, the Iowa caucus operates very differently from the more common primary election used by most other states. The caucus is generally defined as a "gathering of neighbors". Rather than going to polls and casting ballots, Iowans gather at a set location in each of Iowa’s 1,784 precincts. Typically, these meetings occur in schools, churches, or libraries. The caucuses are held every two years, but the ones that receive national attention are the Presidential preference caucuses held every four years. In addition to the voting, caucus attendees propose planks for their party’s platform, select members of the county committees, and discuss issues important to their local organizations.The Iowa caucus does not result directly in national delegates for each candidate, like the first-in-the-nation New Hampshire primary. Instead, caucus-goers elect delegates to county conventions, who elect delegates to district and state conventions where the national convention delegates are selected. The Republicans and Democrats each hold their own set of caucuses subject to their own particular rules that change from time to time. Participants in each party’s caucuses must be registered with that party. Participants can change their registration at the caucus location. Additionally, 17-year-olds can participate, as long as they will be 18 years of age by the date of the general election. Observers are allowed to attend, as long as they do not become actively involved in the debate and voting process."
As I stated in previous posts, I have never liked the Straw Poll (done in Ames Iowa in August) since there is no debate are issues or a really clear choice in frontrunners but I love the caucus experience since it really engaged the voter to participate in the nomination process. I believe that if a caucus was conducted in every state instead of the primary it would reinvigorate the “disenfranchised” to participate in the election process in American and show how important it actually is to vote. Iowans take this very seriously and with all the other states trying to infringe on the “first” status every Iowan I been talking to is going to take second, third and even forth glances at every candidate before deciding so they make this one count. (Sorry for the long post, got a little excited on this one.:)

 
Written By: Jody L. Wilcox
URL: http://thecontemporaryconservative.blogspot.com
I’m with you McQ; this is delicious, and it is so for both Republicans and Democrats! ["Ms. Inevitable" ain’t lookin’ so inevitable now, is she?! Weeee!]

However, I want to make one point I don’t see very often in regards to Romney [except when they post poll numbers for early state Florida], when voting gets to the Southern states in late February and early March, he will hit a hard stop. He won’t make it out of the South, and he and his campaign know this I think deep down in their gut. I think it’s why you see such an almost desperate emphisis by his camp on the early non-southern states. He must win them, and hope this "momentum" sways voters in later primary states.

Down here in the South though, it just isn’t going to matter, and I’ll say out loud That Which Shalt Not Be Mentioned: it’s his religion. There’s no way to get around it, but there it is. His stand as Governor of Massachusetts on the issues of abortion, gay marriage, taxes, illegal immigrants, whatever (although none of his former stands on these issues help either) will matter matter less than that he’s Mormon. It’s an ender, and it’s an ender for me. And I’ll bet a dollar to a dime whether it’s said aloud or not, it’s an ender for most of the South. And honestly, of the top five Repub candidates, even if he weren’t a Mormon, he’s still about fourth place in my book.

But I’d really like some other Southerners opinions on this, or someone to try and change my mind.
 
Written By: Warrior Needs Food Badly
URL: http://
Vnjagvet also hit on something I meant to mention too: the "slickness" of Romney. And I don’t mean the talk, although that may be a part of it, but the over-polished look, perfect hair, perfect teeth, perfect everything. He’s very plastic-seeming to me, and I can’t empathize with him, whereas I can with both Fred and Rudy (my number 1 and 2).

Gads, I hate to be superficial, and knowing where he stood before and where "stands" now on issues important to me is the biggest factor I have against him, it still doesn’t help that I think he’s an over-polished huckster that will say anything we conservolibertian types want ot hear to get himself nominated.
 
Written By: Warrior Needs Food Badly
URL: http://
I have to go with you Warrior, I don’t think they’re going to overlook his religion here in the South.

Not saying it’s right, just saying it IS what it is.
I can remember my Yankee grandparents being worried that Kennedy would bend his knee to Papel edicts (otherwise they were essentially sane people.)
 
Written By: looker
URL: http://
You guys are all missing the REAL reason Huckabee is charging... he’s got CHUCK NORRIS on his side.

I love this angle... and might now have to consider him ;-)
 
Written By: meagain
URL: http://
I wish there was more emphasis on voters voting for who they think had the best policies.

Every Rep (except maybe Ron Paul) can beat Hilary ... if we win in Iraq. Except maybe Romney, because he’s a Mormon, AND he’s too plastic Ken-doll perfect. (Sorry, Hugh).

"Who is electable" is a stupid issue a year before the election. Anybody with a reasonably good personality and on the right side of the issues can get elected, or not.

Huckabee’s worst trait, even worse than his big-spending record, is his "hick" name. But that’s something the vast majority of US voters can get over, if they decide they like him. I sort of do ... but I’m a Christian Libertarian Paternalist, so I would.

Robert Novak points out his record is bad / high on spending. But he did sign the no-tax pledge, so that’s probably taken care of, enough.

Rudy is weak on pro-life, so why would pro-life support him in the primary? None should. He’s not so great on smaller gov’t, either, so why should Lib-conservatives support him? Because he’ll win in Iraq? We’ve already won, we don’t need him, nor John, to win or even to keep up the fight.

Fred’s a bit old and slow, so far. I like Ron Paul (voted for him last time he ran), but he IS a bit crazy, and not electable.

I wish there was more emphasis on voters voting in primaries for who they think had the best policies.
 
Written By: Tom Grey
URL: http://tomgrey.motime.com
Kindly clue me in: why do some people dislike mormons so much that they won’t vote for them even if they agree on actual issues?
 
Written By: Fredrik Nyman
URL: http://
Rudy has one advantage over the other GOP candidates: if Hillary runs, the moderate Dems who hate Hillary would consider voting for him.

If its a right winger, they will hold their nose and elect the beast.

 
Written By: Harun
URL: http://
Wait ’till Ron Paul takes the lead in NH. Huckabee vs Paul face-off for the nomination? Stranger things have happened.
 
Written By: cerebus
URL: http://
Tangentially, it’d be kinda nice to know the Republican big-tent is able to accomodate both christian democrats and libertarians.
 
Written By: cerebus
URL: http://

 
Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
Name:
Email:
URL:
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Comment:
   
 
Vicious Capitalism

Divider

Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks

Divider

Divider