With?a?bevy?of polling suggesting that Republicans are prepared to take a pummeling at the polls in just three short months, how will what?happens this November impact the GOP 2008 field?
While some observers are either predicting a GOP comeback or a Democratic tsunami this fall, the bulk of the polls that I’ve seen suggest moderate Democratic gains that will leave the GOP in control of Congress, but just barely.? The most recent poll released in each of the competitive Senate races show Republicans losing seats in Montana, Missouri, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Rhode Island while Democrats hold every single vulnerable seat.? That suggests that if the election were held today, the GOP’s 55-seat Senate majority would be reduced to a mere 50 seats, with a few caveats.? First, it’s important to remember that the Democrats would only have 48 seats to the GOP’s 50.? Bernie Sanders of Vermont would caucus with the Dems but would technically be an Independent.? So would Joe Lieberman, presuming he gets excommunicated during the coming Connecticut primary.? That should prevent the D’s from calling for a power-sharing agreement, a la 2001.? Also, Michael Steele only loses Maryland if Ben Cardin is the Democratic nominee.? If Mfume defeats Cardin for the Democratic nomination, Republican Steele likely wins the seat, meaning a pickup for Republicans.? Further, Tom Kean may be losing to Menendez in the most recent polling on the New Jersey Senate race, but the margin is so slim that the margin-of-error cannot be ignored.? As such, I predict a 50-52 seat Republican Senate resulting from this year’s elections, with the perhaps hopeful optimism that Joe Lieberman will be peeved enough about the excommunication that he’ll decide to caucus with the Republicans.
In the House, things are equally dire.? If you average the past five polls that test the generic congressional ballot, Democrats lead Republicans by 11 percentage points.? Now, I know that the generic ballot cannot accurately be extrapolated to the number of seats a party stands to gain or lose, but I would suspect that a Democratic win of 11 percent in the House races?would be far more likely to yield a Democratic gain in the high single digits or low double digits than it would be to yield a Republican pickup, a marginal Democratic gain, or a Democratic tidal wave.? There are 232 Republican seats presently.? I suspect that number would be reduced to the lower-220s if the midterms were held today.
So, assuming that the GOP goes into 2007 with, say, 51 Senate seats and around 221 House seats, what will the reaction of the GOP establishment and primary electorate be with regard to the 2008 field?? These numbers are very similar to the congressional margins Bush started out with following the 2000 election, and there will be a real sense among the electorate that anything could happen in 2008 with margins this slim.? With a Democratic triple-play a real possibility, I suspect Republican voters will be that much more determined to go with the best quarterback they can find, and perhaps to field a candidate who makes up for any of the perceived deficiencies of the current president.? Or maybe I’m wrong, and 2006 will have no impact on 2008 whatsoever.? Feel free to share your thoughts on the subject in the comments section.
Sen. Brownback’s presidential campaign may be over before it began:
If money talks in politics, Sen. Sam Brownback’s nascent presidential campaign is but a ghostly whisper.
And if he doesn’t increase his fundraising soon, Brownback risks being drowned out before voters even think about tuning in to 2008.
Money is only one of the obstacles that have emerged to hamper the 49-year-old Kansas Republican’s long-shot effort to ride his politics of conservatism and faith to the White House.
He’s made a few visits but no inroads in New Hampshire, site of the first presidential primary. He’s being outflanked on the right in Iowa, site of the nation’s first caucus. A spate of national media attention hasn’t translated into higher poll numbers, where he’s the top pick of only 1 percent to 2 percent of registered Republicans. And he upset a big chunk of the conservative base by taking a moderate stance on the burning issue of immigration.
Brownback is far behind his better-known competitors in the money chase.
He reported raising less than $200,000 so far this year for his Restore America Political Action Committee; such PACs are how prospective candidates raise money and pay expenses before opening a formal campaign committee. He has about $125,000 left in the bank. Add to that the money left in his Senate campaign fund, which can be transferred to a presidential treasury, and Brownback has about $760,000 on hand.
We never thought we’d be the highest fundraiser,” Hart said. “That’s not the way the dynamic works. We were always going to be the grassroots candidate.”
Those grassroots haven’t taken hold yet.
Brownback’s three trips to New Hampshire, all one-event-and-out affairs, are most notable for their apparent lack of understanding of what Granite Staters expect from candidates, said James Pindell, managing editor of PoliticsNH.com, a well-regarded Web site.
“What typically happens is a candidate will come, do a morning event and an evening event, and spend hours in between sitting in hotel rooms meeting with party activists,” Pindell said. “This is basic. Brownback’s not doing that. It makes me wonder who’s giving him advice about coming to New Hampshire.
Brownback’s high-profile roles during two Supreme Court nominations, the effort to publicize the Darfur genocide and the fight against expanded embryonic stem cell research won much national media attention during the past year. But polls show him mired at 1 percent or 2 percent among Republican presidential contenders ‘ about where he was a year ago.
Sen. Brownback looks to be the first victim to fall in what will be the most expensive presidential contest in American history. The cost of the race, along with the frontloaded primary calender, makes 2008 the least hospitable?contest for an insurgent?candidate in either party, perhaps?ever.
Get ready for a battle?between the 800 lbs. gorillas of each party. There will be no “Jimmy Carters” this time around.??
Not if you’re a Democrat, so?says Peter Brown of Quinnipiac.? Money quote:
“The Democratic problem is not when people vote in the primaries, it is who they pick.”
Well said.
In a speech Saturday, Romney, a Republican considering a run for president in 2008, acknowledged he took a big political risk in taking control of the project after a fatal tunnel ceiling collapse, but said inaction would have been even worse.
“The best thing politically would be to stay as far away from that tar baby as I can,” he told a crowd of about 100 supporters in Ames, Iowa.
Black leaders were outraged at his use of the term, which dates to the 19th century Uncle Remus stories, referring to a doll made of tar that traps Br’er Rabbit. It has come to be known as a way of describing a sticky mess, and has been used as a derogatory term for a black person.
“Tar baby is a totally inappropriate phrase in the 21st century,” said Larry Jones, a black Republican and civil rights activist.
“He think he’s presidential timber,” Jones said. “But all he’s shown us is arrogance.”
Romney’s spokesman, Eric Fehrnstrom, said the governor was describing “a sticky situation.”
“He was unaware that some people find the term objectionable and he’s sorry if anyone’s offended,” Fehrnstrom said.
I’ll leave the analysis to our Romney supporters in the comments. It’s hard to believe that someone who?I’ve personally described as the best Republican?in front of a camera since Ronald Reagan could make such a gaffe.
Whoever the successful 2008 GOP candidate ends up being, s/he’ll almost certainly be one who comprehends the nature of the present-day conservative movement in this country, based in the sunbelt and organized around principles that are a bit different from those of the conservatism of the last half of the 20th Century here in the States.? While essays could be written on this subject, National Review’s John Podhoretz?sums?up the state of conservatism far more?succinctly than I ever would have.? Money quote:
“If there’s anything George W. Bush has, it’s a philosophy, and an intellectually coherent one. He believes that the individual has inherent freedom and dignity, and that this should be the hallmark of all efforts by government. That’s a philosophy, and it extends from “compassionate conservatism” to the Bush doctrine.”
This was John Pod’s response to Peggy Noonan’s latest, in which she comments on the charges of 20th Century conservative forerunners like William F. Buckley that President Bush is something other than a conservative.? I absolutely adore Peggy, whose writing is akin to intellectual porn for me, and I can sympathize with the policy criticisms that she and Buckley and other conservatives, such as George Will and Andrew Sullivan, have toward?the president.? I do think that John Pod is correct, though, that whatever else Bush conservatism is, it’s anything but philosophically unsound.? And I would further opine that one of the reasons a disconnect does seem to exist between many of the older conservatives and the Bushies is that the two groups are representative of two different types of conservatism, one being based in the broad American west and the border states, the other having its base in the deep south and interior west.
Words like “conservative” and “liberal” are just that; the definitions change over time, depending on the issues of the day and the coalitions and voting blocs that organize around those terms.? The center-right majority that assembled itself in 2002 and 2004 is not the same conservative plurality that was led by Nixon and Reagan during the last century, though the two groups share many of the same elements.? Today’s Republican majority is one that is held together by the cogent philosophy articulated by John Pod: human freedom and dignity trump all else.? How we get there is up to our leaders, and if the country truly has turned against the president and the?Washington GOP, it’s not because the 2004 majority has disbanded, but because?our leaders?have failed in the execution of their stated goals.? The next national GOP leader will likely be one who is able to articulate policies to achieve these same goals, only with a leaner, less wasteful government that is more effective in the implementation?of these policies, is able to?execute them with less intrusion into people’s lives and pocketbooks, and that expends fewer precious?American resources abroad.
I like Kate O’Beirne.? She’s always seemed bright and articulate on cable news — a calm voice of the Buckleyite conservatism of our past — and she was nothing but classy when I met her in person at an NR?function last year.? But the column she has penned on the presidential chances of Rudy Giuliani for the latest edition of National Review comes very close to being nothing more than a hit piece on America’s Mayor.
Unfortunately, the column in its entirety requires a subscription to access online.? About half of the column can be found here, though a little sleuthing over at Free Republic may be able to get you the whole article (wink, wink).? O’Beirne’s column can be summed up as follows:
1) Rudy is America’s Mayor, insanely popular, and a great fundraiser.
2) BUT Rudy’s positions on social issues are unacceptable to most conservatives.
3) SO Rudy’s presidential chances are doomed.
The article is chalked full of the conventional “wisdom” of the Boston-NYC-DC corridor, that same region that predicted for ages that President Nelson Rockefeller would be a reality despite all the indications to the contrary from, you know, the bulk of America.? Not once does the column attempt to think outside the box, to consider what the impact of a social issues shift of a Giuliani campaign would be.? Instead, O’Beirne views a Rudy candidacy?through?parameters narrow enough to allow her to reach her desired conclusion, one that eliminates Rudy from the roster of likely Republican nominees.
I think O’Beirne and those like her who have spent a bit too much time amongst the eastern establishment will be quite surprised in just 18 months when Rudy finishes in the top 3 in Iowa.? If Mitt Romney, George Allen, and John McCain can all shift in varying degrees rightward on abortion over the past ten years, Rudy can at least make it over the acceptability threshhold on that and other cultural issues, and, given how much conservatives want to like Rudy according to every single poll that’s taken on the issue, acceptability is all he’ll need.?
I would also warn O’Beirne and others not to put too much stock into ancient quotes from the ’80s and ’90s that make Rudy sound like a liberal.? What must be remembered is that Rudy was campaigning to win votes in one of the nation’s most midnight-blue cities.? It’s true that Rudy’s mayoral campaigns are chalked full of liberal quotes.? But what’s also true is that while Rudy campaigned as a liberal, he governed as a conservative.? Just check the record.? Rudy was a Reaganite on taxes, a Gingrichite on cutting and reforming government, and a Bushite on toughness and the bad guys.? Even on social issues, Rudy was more of a pragmatist than anything.? A socially liberal ideologue would never have padlocked porn shops in the name of order.? But Rudy made himself sound like a liberal to New Yorkers to get elected and then governed from the center-right, just like Bill Clinton made himself sound like a conservative to the nation to get elected and governed from the center-left.? In 2008, Rudy will be campaigning to win the nation — a much more conservative electorate than he faced in New York — and will run on his conservative record, not away from it.? I would ask NR to analyze that sort of run, but we’ll probably have to give the conventional wisdom a little more time to catch up to the true wisdom of the American people.
Quite possibly according to the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review:
Ronald Reagan was the last candidate to make New York see red. Recent polls suggest Rudy Giuliani may be the next.
Gallup has three of four Republicans putting him at the top of their list.
He loves the Yankees, roasted peanuts (shells included) and the opera. During radiation treatments for prostate cancer, his staff played “stump the mayor” with operatic trivia.
His moderate Republican face displayed all of our anger, grief and horror on Sept. 11. A voracious reader, he turned that night to Roy Jenkins’ Winston Churchill biography, poring over its recounting of how vital Churchill was to Britain’s survival during World War II.
Today, he stands on the verge of running for president. The most formidable things he faces between now and the 2008 primaries are the hearts of conservative Republicans. His rather liberal record as a pro-choice, pro-gun-control with tolerance for gay marriage moderate could cause hair to rise on the back of the necks of the right.
Ray Hoffmann, GOP chairman in Iowa, home to the first presidential caucus, saw his state go red for the first time in 20 years in 2004. “Our Republicans are on the conservative side,” he says, “but anything is possible.”
Does Giuliani stand a chance? “Absolutely. … It is up to him and his message. … Maybe he has moderated some of his positions on social issues.”
Club for Growth President Pat Toomey agrees. When seeking his second term in Congress, Toomey moved his own position to that of pro-life. For conservatives to warm to Giuliani, he says, “is plausible. … If he starts out by offering up positions that oppose federal funding for abortions and stem-cell research, and promises a constructionist position on judges, well, then, who knows?”
“Twenty years ago, no way,” says New Hampshire GOP county chair Wayne Semprini, “but the New Hampshire Republicans of today, that’s a different story. … While there are still a good amount of conservatives here, there are a lot more moderates.”
South Carolina, the gateway to the South with that region’s first primary, is staunchly conservative. But former GOP chair Barry Wynn says it “depends on the conditions in the country. If the primary were held today, Rudy would be out in front just on leadership. … The house is on fire and we are sorely lacking firemen — Giuliani would fill that role.”
Bill Bennett, a conservative talk-show host and Bush 41 drug czar, thinks Giuliani stands a chance with conservatives: “Sure, look what is happening on the campaign trail. … His stands on social issues can be an obstacle, but not a blockade.
“Giuliani starts with more positives than McCain in states like Texas and with the Baptist belt, and the upcoming 9/11 movie will probably give him a huge boost.”
Rudyblogger, DaveG, and myself are hardly “alone in the wilderness” on Rudy’s chances should he moderate his social views.
For those that state that Rudy has no chance to win the GOP nomination in 2008, we are still waiting for some empirical evidence to back up your assertions.
RB, DaveG, and myself have backed up our claims. Show us your cards in the comments section. Go ahead…Make our day.?
The latest Mason-Dixon poll was released today:
Republican Sen. George Allen has a 16-point lead over Democratic challenger Jim Webb in the latest independent statewide poll, published Sunday, but a fifth of the electorate is still undecided.
Forty-eight percent backed Allen and 32 percent supported Webb in the Mason-Dixon Polling & Research Inc. survey of registered voters likely to vote in the Nov. 7 election.
Of course, Pravda (oops! I meant the Associated Press), manages?to turn this news into an opportunity to bash President Bush. But what liberal media!!!???
Republicans are girding for battle against Hillary Clinton and are looking for a true warrior to lead them in this fight. To win, we’ll need a take no prisoners approach, not vodka-drinking contests and “transcending the current polarization,” ideas that make me and my fellow conservatives want to puke.
Read this well, because it goes to the heart of why McCain would be a lousy nominee against Hillary. He’d pull his punches. Rudy wouldn’t.
Mrs. Clinton and Mr. McCain, however, share not just a title, but also a general approach to politics. Both strive to be seen as willing to break with ideological orthodoxy from time to time and to work across the aisle. Both emerged from nasty political battles ‘ Whitewater and her husband’s impeachment in her case, the 2000 Republican primaries in his ‘ declaring their hatred of the “politics of personal destruction,” as former President Bill Clinton called it.
“They would run a completely different campaign than we’ve seen in recent memory,” said Marshall Wittman, a former aide to Mr. McCain who has worked with Mrs. Clinton.
“Both of them realize there is a desire in the country for a different politics of national unity that transcends the current polarization,” Mr. Wittman said.
As I’ve been out of the loop for the past few days, I’ve missed the opportunity to comment on a few news items that lend support to my thesis that George Allen and Rudy Giuliani will be the last men standing in the contest for the GOP nomination in 2008.?
I articulated my recent epiphany?here, where I argued that an Allen/Rudy race is inevitable due to the fact that the Virginia senator and the former mayor are the only serious 2008 candidates registering net positive support among both GOP activists and casual Republican voters.
On the heels of that post came a poll of New Hampshire GOP insiders, discussed earlier?by Kavon, which shows Allen and Giuliani taking the top two spots again, this time among Granite State Republicans.? As Kavon rightly noted, this poll is meaningless with regard to the New Hampshire electorate, which will consist of both strong Republicans and weak GOPers, as well as scores of independents.? But taken for what it is — a poll of committed Republicans — it does serve as support for the argument that Giuliani and Allen are just a tad more popular than everyone else in the field among the rank and file.
And then we have this?tidbit, also posted by Kavon, informing us that the aspect of the nomination contest nearly as important as popular support — the money race — is being won by, you guessed it, Allen and Rudy.
And finally, the very politically savvy Pat Ruffini has garnered over 21 thousand votes on a presidential straw poll perpetually linked to his blog.? The results?are very anti-climactic given all of the aforementioned evidence.? It’s an Allen/Giuliani race.
Now, I will warn prognosticators to avoid getting too certain of anything in politics, given its long history of light-speed changes.? I still remember Pat Buchanan proclaiming that the ‘04 Democratic contest was a Kerry/Gephardt race, and we all saw how that turned out.? But it is important to keep in mind that contests for the Republican nomination are almost always more stable and more dependent on hierarchy than battles for the Democratic nod.? The fact that Rudy is the actual frontrunner in the race based on the scientific polls and that Allen is sort of a shadow frontrunner based on the straw polls of party activists is pretty solid evidence that these two guys aren’t going away anytime soon.
In response to Rudyblogger’s post regarding the history of Rudy’s abortion stance, I would like to bring to your attention the following passage from Lifenews.com, one of the most stridently Pro-Life groups on the web:
Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, who says he’s a recent pro-life convert, vetoed an embryonic stem cell research promotion bill in his state and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, two other 2008 possibilities, are both pro-life.
To refresh everyone’s memory, Mitt Romney campaigned for Governor in 2002 hoping that abortion “remain safe and legal.”
If it was so easy for Mitt to flip his abortion stance, (so much so that Lifenews now groups him with Pro-Life candidates), why are people so skeptical of Rudy’s chances should he change his position?
A very suspicious (and perhaps a tad demented) person might see more than just evidence of global warming in this heat wave that’s crisping up the country of late. Clearly, there’s a mysterious scheme afoot to get Al Gore elected – or, re-elected if you like – as president of the United States in 2008.
“We’re in the midst of the most brilliant campaign launch in history, even if he didn’t mean it,” said Dylan Malone, chairman of AlGore.org, the Internet home of a growing group of “Gore to the Core” loyalists. Malone and his group are hoping to capitalize on Gore’s current celebrity to build a vast grass-roots network of Gore supporters and raise money. So far, they have collected $10,000 in one month just through Internet donations, Malone said.
The Democrats certainly couldn’t do much better than the man who gets rock-star treatment on his book tour. His famous wooden persona has relaxed from years performing before a live audience. And his earnest wonkiness has suddenly become an asset in a country that’s starting to realize it has a gasoline addiction that is extremely hazardous to its health.
Plus, he won once. He might be able to do it again.
Yes! Al Gore is back and ready to fight the power!
As a Republican, nothing could get me as excited as?the Democrats nominating someone that we have caught on film blaming all of America’s problems on “The Jews” to a group of Saudi officials in Saudi Arabia. What campaign comercials that will make!
Go Al go!??
They can be found here:
National Journal Republican 2008 Ranking July 26th, 2006
1. John McCain
2. Mitt Romney
3. George Allen
4. Rudy Giuliani
5. Mike Huckabee
What can I say that I haven’t been saying for the past two-weeks? 4 out of 10 Republicans find McCain unacceptable as a presidential candidate. While Rudy leads McCain and every other candidate by every measure you can devise.
I am tempted to move Romney to #3 in my next Power Rankings revision. Mitt has had an awesome couple of months in just about every criteria.
George Allen is busy with his Senate reelection campaign. Win big in November and he may shoot near the top of this list.
National Journal echoes my concerns regarding the ability of Huckabee to raise the funds necessary to make a serious run.
Hotline ponders how the midterms will affect 2008.?
Regarding George Allen:
His folks believe there is some lemonade to be made out of Democrat James Webb’s challenge. Obviously, a loss sends Allen into political retirement instead of Iowa or New Hampshire. But the good news is that a win’s a win. And should Allen win, he will be able to brag that he’s as electable, if not more, than other Republicans because he withstood a stiff challenge from a solid candidate in a purple state.
I will respectfully disagree with The Hotline on this one. I believe that Allen winning by less than a respectable margin (5 to 10 pts.)?will likely hinder?him; and a win of 4 points or less?will likely doom him?in ‘08. People will wonder how he could?be elected POTUS if he just squeaks by?as an incumbent Senator in?a Red State.
If he wins big (10 pts. or more), the?sky is the limit for him come 2008.
BTW, since when does a?Republican?winning a state by over 8 points make that state “Purple”? ?
Keeping in line with all current polling, Giuliani?and McCain remain #1 & #2.?
Strategic Vision Florida, July 21-23, 2006:
Who is your first choice for the Republican nomination in 2008? (Republicans only)
Rudy Giuliani 40%
John McCain 30%
George Allen 7%
Newt Gingrich 5%
Mitt Romney 4%
Bill Frist 2%
George Pataki 1%
Rick Santorum 1%
Chuck Hagel 1%
Undecided 9%
If Condoleeza Rice were to run for President in 2008, whom would you support for the Republican nomination in 2008? (Republicans only)
Rudy Giuliani 35%
John McCain 20%
Condoleeza Rice 16%
George Allen 5%
Mitt Romney 4%
Newt Gingrich 3%
Bill Frist 2%
George Pataki 1%
Rick Santorum 1%
Chuck Hagel 1%
Undecided 12%
Strategic Vision Washington, July 21-23, 2006:
For the 2008 Republican Presidential Nomination whom would you support? (Republicans Only)
Rudy Giuliani 38%
John McCain 26%
Mitt Romney 9%
Newt Gingrich 5%
Bill Frist 4%
George Allen 2%
Rick Santorum 1%
George Pataki 1%
Chuck Hagel 1%
Undecided 13%
If Condoleeza Rice were to run for President in 2008, whom would you support for the Republican nomination in 2008? (Republicans only)
Rudy Giuliani 34%
John McCain 21%
Condoleeza Rice 16%
Mitt Romney 7%
Newt Gingrich 5%
Bill Frist 2%
George Allen 2%
George Pataki 1%
Rick Santorum 1%
Chuck Hagel 1%
Undecided 10%
I finally?received my copy of the latest issue of National Review in the mail?today- the one?with the infamous Rudy/Marilyn Monroe photo on the cover.
The article really doesn’t add anything new to the?debate regarding Rudy’s presumptive presidential campaign. We get the same tired?”Rudy’s too liberal”; or the patronizing?”Once the ignorant Iowegans find out who Rudy really is, he will lose his standing in the polls” arguments.
One particularly intellectually dishonest argument does need to be addressed. After citing various polls showing Rudy with significant support, O’Beirne makes the?following “point”:
“…yet about 70 percent of likely Republican voters don’t endorse a potential Giuliani candidacy for president.”
I’m not sure that this argument would have made it?past the vetting of a high school debate coach, so I’m rather suprised it made it past the editors of the most respected conservative magazine in America.
By this argument, we should discount a McCain, Allen, Romney, Gingrich, and every other Republican candidate in the 2008 race as they have either near, or far less of a percentage of Republicans who “don’t endorse” their candidacies.
To those who may believe that O’Beirne is referring to a poll(s) which show that 70% of likely Republican voters do not want Hizzoner to run for president, please?do an internet search to try to find such a poll. They simply?do not exist. Giuliani consistently tops polls of Republicans that gauge overall favorability.?In fact,?Giuliani is viewed as an acceptable presidential nominee by 7 out of?10 Republicans.
This intellectual sleight of hand casts a dark shadow over the entire article, making it appear more like a “hit piece” than journalistic analysis.
CNN has an update of the financial status?of Republican and Democratic presidential?hopefuls.
George Allen and Rudy Giuliani lead the GOP field, with Hillary Clinton?and John Kerry far ahead for the Dems.
John McCain’s presidential dreams that is:
It’s a warm evening, even for South Carolina, even for late June. It’s especially warm ‘ sweat-dripping hot, actually ‘ inside the Lace House, a lovely antebellum home on the grounds of the governor’s mansion in downtown Columbia. But heat or no heat, a crowd of South Carolina Republican politicos, candidates, and activists has come to the Lace House to raise money for the party’s 2006 candidates ‘ and to get a firsthand look at the event’s guest of honor, Sen. John McCain. Of course they’re all quite familiar with McCain, whose 2000 presidential campaign died here after an ugly primary fight with George W. Bush. But they’ve come to see the McCain who is planning to run again in 2008. Is he the same guy? What will his campaign be like? Should they support him? Their feelings seem to be a little, well, complicated.
“Like everyone else, I’m here to support the party,” says one woman asked for her thoughts about McCain.
“Well, yes, but what about McCain?”
“Like everyone else, I’m here to support the party,” she repeats.
“Let’s not talk about McCain,” adds another attendee. And those are just the people who decided to come. When the state Republican party sent out invitations a few weeks earlier, it received quite a few responses with messages like “I can’t believe you’re inviting him to speak” and “I’m not coming.” And that was from the party’s list of loyal donors.
Even Gov. Mark Sanford ‘ a big McCain supporter in 2000 who, a couple of hours earlier, greeted the senator at the airport ‘ seems a little hesitant to talk about McCain. Ducking out to the front porch with a glass of iced tea, he begs off when asked to assess McCain’s prospects, explaining that he needs to greet a few friends. Maybe later. And then, later, Sanford offers a tepid and clich?d read on the situation. “You never say never in the world of politics,” he says. “As always, it depends on who you talk to. You can find some folks who are very receptive [to McCain] and other folks who are a lot less receptive.”
Well, yes, that’s true. In any case, Sanford isn’t ready to sing McCain’s praises this time around ‘ not yet, anyway. He’s up for reelection in November ‘ heavily favored to win a second term ‘ and he’s looking for Republican votes. Why alienate those who might be put off by an early embrace of McCain? Just look around, and you’ll find Republicans who don’t like the senator’s position on immigration. (You hear the word “amnesty” a lot.) You’ll find Republicans unhappy with his part in last year’s “Gang of 14″ deal that broke the deadlock over appeals-court nominations. (In South Carolina, the party faithful were locked and loaded for the nuclear option.) Some are still mad that McCain voted against the early Bush tax cuts. And some worry that he’s just too old for the job. (He’ll be 72 on Inauguration Day 2009, two years older than Ronald Reagan when he took office.)
Of course changes to the 2008 Primary Calender can lessen the importance of South Carolina (there is speculation that as many as 10 other states could hold their primaries on Feb 5th, 2008-the same day as SC). However, the fact remains that the Palmetto State is the great conservative filter in the Republican primaries and that no candidate that has lost South Carolina has ever gone on to win the GOP nomination.
That being said,?it is difficult to imagine McCain capturing the nomination without winning SC; and to do that he most assuredly?needs?Gov. Sanford. Having only Lindsey Graham’s support would likely reenforce concerns that some voters?already have about him.
Marist College Poll, July 11-14, 2006:
Hillary Clinton outdistances the Democratic primary field among New York Democrats for president in 2008. Most Democrats and a majority of independents generally think she is ideologically about right, neither too liberal nor too conservative. New York voters divide over whether they would like to see her enter the presidential contest in 2008 even though many think she will.
But most registered voters, including a majority of Democrats, do not think she is likely to win. In match-ups for the 2008 presidential contest between Democrat Clinton and the leading Republicans, this traditionally blue state becomes competitive with Republican McCain and moves into the red column with Republican Giuliani.
But most registered voters, including a majority of Democrats, do not think she is likely to win. In match-ups for the 2008 presidential contest between Democrat Clinton and the leading Republicans, this traditionally blue state becomes competitive with Republican McCain and moves into the red column with Republican Giuliani.
Both Rudy Giuliani and John McCain put New York’s 31 electoral votes in play for the Republicans against Hillary Clinton. In match-ups against the two top Republican contenders in New York, Senator Clinton trails former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani by 9 points. She runs competitively against Senator John McCain.
Gov. Romney is set to be the star of?a documentary devoted to his nascent presidential campaign:
Hoping to put a “human face on Mormons,” filmmaker Mitch Davis is making a $1 million documentary following Massachusetts GOP Gov. Mitt Romney along the campaign trail. Davis has also launched a PAC to counter a perceived religious bias against Romney and has started www.RunMitt Run.org.
Davis: “The last thing Mitt Romney wants to be is the Mormon candidate, but inevitably, the issue has to be addressed. And it’s beneath Mitt Romney to do the heavy lifting on this.”
I’m not sure what a poll of insiders in an open primary state is worth (if anything). But it is worthy to note that among party insiders in New Hampshire, Allen and Rudy come out on top.
U.S. Sen. George Allen of Virginia came out on top in a N.H. Insider poll that asked people whom they would vote for if the 2008 Republican presidential primary were held now.
The poll took place between June 8-13, and targeted N.H. Republican insiders, activists and leaders via e-mail, said Stephen DeMaura, founder of the N.H. Insider Web site.
“That’s where a majority of those responses are from,” DeMaura said of the poll results.
Five hundred and two votes were cast. Computer software automatically calculated percentages, and each vote was added to the tally.
Allen claimed the highest number of votes with 16 percent.
Bill Bozin, spokesman for George Allen, said, “The sentiments are greatly appreciated, but Sen. Allen is focused on his re-election in Virginia.”
Former New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani came in second with 13 percent, and Mass. Gov. Mitt Romney was third with 12 percent of the vote.
Sen. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist of Tennessee both received a 2 percent of the vote.
Race 4 2008 would like to welcome new writer?”theKid” to our site.
TheKid?is a?student majoring in politics at Saint Anselm College in Manchester, NH.? Originally from Massachusetts, he?found New Hampshire a safe haven, quickly rising among the ranks and becoming Treasure of the New Hampshire State Federation of College Republicans.??TheKid also holds positions with the Knights of Columbus and is the New Hampshire Chairman of students4allen.? He began his blogging career on Too Right To Be Wrong and hopes to be a meaningful contributor to Race42008.??
Ryan Sager?anoints Giuliani the frontrunner.? I would agree, and I concur with Sager’s take on a Giuliani v. McCain race.? Sager’s column is clearly designed to grab the attention of those individuals still maintaining an MSM-induced belief that McCain has ‘08 wrapped up, even though we here at Race 4 2008 have long ago dispensed with the notion that McCain will end up anywhere near the nomination.? I think Sager’s column would’ve been far more interesting?had he analyzed the impact of an Allen or a Romney on Giuliani’s chances.
With over 5,800 ballots cast in the online straw poll?developed by “GOP Bloggers,” conservative activists?have spoken, and the message they have sent is both similar to and dissimilar from their more casual Republican brethren who opined on the same question in a recent Gallup poll, the analysis of which can be found here.? In each poll, Republicans were asked to rank each potential 2008 candidate as acceptable or unacceptable, with the candidates then ranked according to net acceptability.? When taken together, these polls paint a very clear picture of a two-man race, as only two candidates enjoy net majority acceptability?ratings among both the conservative activists in the GOP Bloggers poll and casual Republicans in the Gallup poll.
Want to find out who these two men are?? Read on… (more…)
From the reports I’ve read (I was not able to catch it live), Round One?goes to Allen:
During the debate, Allen tried to needle Webb, a novelist who has also worked on feature films in Hollywood. Allen spoke of pursuing “Virginia values” instead of “Hollywood values” and made several references to Webb’s writing career.
At one point, in reference to a question about the Guantanamo Bay prison, Webb spoke of a book he wrote that mentioned detainees after World War II. Allen responded by saying that he had visited Guantanamo Bay. “That is the real world. That is not a book,” Allen said.
Allen’s campaign had said it wanted to highlight Webb’s lack of knowledge on issues facing Virginia.
A half-hour into the debate, Allen caught the challenger off guard by asking him a question that forced Webb to admit he was unfamiliar with Portsmouth’s Craney Island, which consists of dredged material that officials hope to turn into a cargo terminal.
“Craney Island is in Virginia,” said Allen, who then lectured Webb about the site. “I got it, George. I got it, George,” Webb responded.
Mark “The Great One” Levin submits several devastating blows The Maverick’s way this week on issues he is supposedly strongest, including defense policy and limited government.
The links on Levin’s “And Another Thing…” NRO online blog brings us yet another Cock crowing closer to a maverick of a King Lear moment. Even the supposed good clothes appear to be threadbare.
Palmetto logs protected the Eighth Colony of a fledgling nation’s independence from the cannon balls of the British Empire?over?200 years ago and this republic from a far inferior Chief Executive over 250 months ago, and should this horse survive cornfield caucuses?and a Live Free or Die primary again?to cross the Catawba and Savannah?Rivers in 2008, the logs will end spell the end of the Arizonian’s race a second time. Elephants don’t forget. Especially those reared in the State of Fort Sumter. That said, he’s better than any democrat except for Zell and many republicans. All the more reason to make sure we test all the candidates thoroughly on all the major issues and even the minor ones.
Strategic Vision Pennsylvania, July 14-16, 2006
Who is your choice for the Republican Presidential nomination in 2008? (Republicans only)
Rudy Giuliani 42%
John McCain 25%
Newt Gingrich 5%
Mitt Romney 5%
Bill Frist 4%
George Allen 3%
Rick Santorum 1%
George Pataki 1%
Chuck Hagel 1%
Undecided 13%
Strategic Vision Wisconsin, July 14-16, 2006
Who is your choice for the Republican Presidential nomination in 2008? (Tommy Thompson included; Republicans only)
Rudy Giuliani 26%
John McCain 23%
Tommy Thompson 22%
Mitt Romney 6%
Newt Gingrich 5%
Bill Frist 2%
Rick Santorum 1%
George Pataki 1%
George Allen 1%
Chuck Hagel 1%
Undecided 12%
Who is your choice for the Republican Presidential nomination in 2008? (Tommy Thompson excluded; Republicans only)
Rudy Giuliani 36%
John McCain 33%
Mitt Romney 7%
Newt Gingrich 6%
George Allen 3%
Bill Frist 2%
Rick Santorum 1%
George Pataki 1%
Chuck Hagel 1%
Undecided 10%
Murdoch “Unlikely” to Back?Clinton in Race for President
Rupert Murdoch, the conservative media mogul, said it was unlikely that he would support Hillary Clinton if she were to run for president – just days after hosting a New York fundraiser for her Senate re-election campaign.
Appearing on the Charlie Rose Show, the US public television interview programme, Mr Murdoch said on Thursday that if the 2008 presidential contest came down to a choice between Mrs Clinton, the Democratic frontrunner, and John McCain, the Republican frontrunner, he would “probably support McCain. If it was happening today, I think so.”
I’m assuming that Murdoch is walking a slippery slope here; namely, that he views Clinton as the most easily defeated Democratic nominee in 2008 and wants to do what he can to help ensure her nomination.
If this is indeed the case, it’s a risky move on his part for two reasons:?First, it may strengthen the “Hillary Can’t Win” faction in the Democratic Party by illustrating the fact?that she may be the Republicans preferred opponent; Secondly, helping to secure more of what your enemy needs to defeat?you on their behalf?is counter-productive on its face.??
I hope Murdoch knows what he’s doing.
There really hasn’t been much buzz on Newt running in ‘08 from major media outlets for the past six-months or so. However, Gingrich’s multiple daily TV appearances since the beginning of the Isreal-Lebanon conflict has changed that. Rich Lowry bloviates on the pro’s & con’s of Newt 2008:
The casual TV viewer has probably noticed two things during the past few days — there’s a war in the Middle East, and Newt Gingrich is commenting on it.
Gingrich has been a ubiquitous analyst on the war — ubiquity being one of the tireless, outsized former House speaker’s favorite qualities. In between appearances in his role as a commentator for the Fox News Channel, Gingrich announced on “Meet the Press” that we are in the midst of World War III. A few days later, Hezbollah declared that it welcomed World War III, nicely capturing the moment: Simultaneous with its shooting war with Israel, Hezbollah is in a war of words with Newt Gingrich.
What thrills Republicans about Gingrich’s media appearances is the sense of intellectual mastery — that he has the arguments, along with the words, to beat all comers. And he hasn’t been shy about criticizing the Bush administration or the Republican Congress. This puts Gingrich in the enviable position of being a keen Beltway player, but one not associated with an unpopular GOP establishment.
It’s hard to see any plausible path to victory for Gingrich unless George Allen and Mitt Romney fizzle, freeing up room for an anti-McCain conservative. But the first-in-the-nation Iowa caucuses are a conservative bastion. In 2000, even unserious candidates Alan Keyes and Gray Bauer combined for 23 percent of the vote. “I think he could do very well in Iowa,” says top Republican pollster John McLaughlin, “and you never know.”
If one of Gingrich’s strengths is that he is enamored of ideas, a weakness is that he seems too enamored of his own. He has ethical issues from his time as speaker related to a book contract and the funding of a college course he taught, but in the Age of Abramoff those scandals seem quaint. More potentially damaging is his messy personal life and the sense of arrogance that sank his speakership.
Whatever happens, Gingrich stands to be the party’s most important intellectual table-setter. “Whoever wins,” says Gillespie, “is going to have spent a lot of time talking about what Newt was talking about.” There are worse places for the party to look for a renewed agenda.
I have speculated before on this blog that Newt’s showing in early ‘08 contests will suprise many the pundit.
Conventional wisdom goes that Rudy will be eaten alive by the hard right once he enters the primaries, leaving McCain as the sole contender who can beat Hillary. But can McCain build a constituency out from the conservatives who will putatively abandon Rudy (outside of his paid staff)? The Gallup poll, Strategic Vision state polls, and a new blogosphere poll all suggest that the answer is a clear and resounding “No.”
Savvy ‘08 watchers were rocked this week by the “surprising” news that McCain is found unacceptable by 4 in 10 Republicans. This was no surprise to those of us who have been watching the Internet for months. Now, a new blogosphere poll has come out mirroring the Gallup poll, and it not only asks how acceptable the candidates are, but asks their supporters to rate themselves on a conservative scale from 1 to 10.
And with nearly 4,000 votes cast, John McCain has the most liberal support base (6.01 conservative) of any candidate, except for Chuck Hagel (5.89). Rudy’s support base is nearly a point more conservative (6.88), which places his supporter base in the solid mainstream of the Republican Party. Other candidates of note who rated more highly are Mitt Romney (7.02), Bill Frist (7.23), and George Allen (7.41). Rudy’s supporters look more like Sam Brownback’s (7.45) than John McCain’s. Rudy only gets net negative ratings in the 10% or so who categorize themselves as “ultraconservative” and even 36% of them approve of his candidacy.
Oh, and this solidly conservative group of bloggers find Rudy to be acceptable by 61% to 31%, while McCain is unacceptable by 69% to 22%.
This poll merely confirms something else we had known for a while: what support McCain does get comes from the GOP left. These people either won’t vote, or will gravitate to whomever else becomes the maverick flavor of the month as McCain rehabs himself into a Falwellian.
We see this hinted at in the Strategic Vision polls, all of which show McCain bleeding support once a candidate like Condi is entered into the race. Condi is somewhat of an enigma, a default choice for the wavering or unaffiliated. McCain’s RINO supporters seem to fall disproportionately in this category.
Counterintuitively, Rudy’s support seems harder to budge and more grounded in the mainstream of the party, with the people who attend Lincoln Day dinners, walk precincts, and generally decide primaries.
