RSS 2.0 FeedRepublican Race Update: Unsettled But Still More Of The Same
by Doug MataconisThe latest ABC-Washington Post poll is out and it shows that the Republican race for the nomination, but that things aren’t all that different than they were when the summer started:
Rudolph W. Giuliani leads the race for the GOP presidential nomination, with Republican voters describing him as the field’s strongest leader and most electable candidate in the 2008 general election, according to a Washington Post-ABC News poll.
But the Republican contest remains unsettled just three months before the first votes will be cast, and in comparison with fellow New York politician Hillary Rodham Clinton, Giuliani is a far less solid front-runner. He has double the support of his nearest rival, but a majority of those who support him do so only “somewhat.” At the same time, his advantages on key attributes are smaller today than they were earlier in the campaign, reflecting continued uncertainty among Republicans about their choices in the presidential race.
The poll also marked an interruption in what had been a slow but steady rise in support for Fred D. Thompson. The former senator from Tennessee nearly doubled his support from April to early September as he prepared to enter the race, but he has not picked up additional backing since.
Giuliani topped the Republican field with 34 percent, with Thompson at 17 percent and Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) at 12 percent in the new poll. Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney was in fourth with 11 percent but has continued to make strong showings in polls testing the crucial early contests in Iowa and New Hampshire.
Former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee took 8 percent, his best showing in a Post-ABC poll. Rep. Ron Paul (Tex.) had 3 percent; Rep. Duncan Hunter (Calif.), 2 percent; and Sen. Sam Brownback (Kan.) and Rep. Tom Tancredo (Colo.), 1 percent.
McCain has slipped somewhat over the past month, dipping to his lowest level of the year. Early last month, Giuliani led with 28 percent and McCain trailed with 18 percent; Thompson was at 19 percent. But other findings in the new poll showed McCain holding up well against the other candidates, despite the severe turbulence his campaign experienced over the summer.
In perhaps the clearest sign of why the race remains muddled, there was no consensus as to which candidate best reflects the party’s core values. McCain scored 26 percent on this question, even though he has parted with the party’s base on immigration and campaign finance revisions. Giuliani registered at 23 percent and Thompson 21 percent. Romney was cited by 13 percent.
And, for better or for worse, it seems like, Giuliani’s strategy of running as the President of 9/11 is working to some extent:
Giuliani’s lead in the GOP race is tightly wrapped with views of his performance after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. Nearly all Republicans said he did a “good” or “excellent” job responding to the attacks, with a majority calling his performance excellent. Most also said they believe his performance is a good indicator of what kind of president he would be.
Among those who believe he excelled after the attacks, and among those who say those skills translate easily to the presidency, Giuliani holds a lead of more than 30 percentage points over his rivals.
All of this, though, is overshadowed by the fact that no Republican candidate has as much support in their party as Hillary Clinton has among Democrats:
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton has consolidated her place as the front-runner in the contest for the Democratic presidential nomination, outpacing her main rivals in fundraising in the most recent quarter and widening her lead in a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.
For the first time, Clinton (N.Y.) is drawing support from a majority of Democrats — and has opened up a lead of 33 percentage points over Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.). Her popularity, the poll suggests, is being driven by her strength on key issues and a growing perception among voters that she would best represent change.
The inevitability of Hillary, whether one likes it or not, seems more and more depressingly apparent.
When the dust has settled, Guliani will go crawling back to that hole he emerged from in NYC (you know, that 9/11 hole)
As much as I don’t like Fred and will be voting for Ron Paul (if he’s still in during the Texas primary), Fred’s the only one that has captured the hearts (as they have no minds) of the neocon faithful and has a message anywhere on the same planet as libertarians.
I choke when I say this, but I’m actually more interested in whether Obama beats Hillary than anyone that has a chance of winning on the Republican side.
Comment by Greg — October 3, 2007 @ 7:32 amGreg,
Actually, I’m more curious about that race too. I even considered whether Obama might be worth a vote until I checked out his record on the issues.
http://www.ontheissues.org/senate/Barack_Obama.htm
Pro-union, pro-welfare, pro-socialized medicine, anti-immigration…think I’ll pass on him.
On the Republican side, though, Thompson’s probably not the worst of the bunch, but there’s also roughly a 50% chance he won’t survive to finish out his term because of his non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma:
http://www.sacbee.com/111/story/376419.html
And to be honest, I wonder if the odds aren’t worse than that. In the latest appearances I’ve seen the guy looks horrible (although that was back in August and it’s possible he just had a couple of bad days). The 50% stat was the 10 year survival rate for lymphoma from the time of diagnosis (his was found back in 2004) so he’d be in year five by the time he actually took office (63% survival rate). I’m not trying to dance on the guy’s grave and I wish him well, but I’m not so sure it’s a good idea to vote for someone if we’re not sure they can physically finish out their term.
Comment by UCrawford — October 3, 2007 @ 11:01 amActually, I was looking for more recent images and I found his comments on Ahmadinejad’s Columbia appearance where he bitches about free speech.
http://fredfile.fred08.com/2007/ahmadinejad-speaks-at-columbia-fred-responds/
Screw what I said before, Thompson sucks.
Comment by UCrawford — October 3, 2007 @ 11:09 amI’m absolutely not going to vote for him, but I wouldn’t avoid him just because of his health. I would just screen his VP closely to make sure I was in good hands either way.
Comment by Jeff Molby — October 3, 2007 @ 12:02 pmJeff,
It’s a moot point anyway…I’m not going to vote for a guy who claims that it’s America’s role to free the oppressed in Iran.
Comment by UCrawford — October 3, 2007 @ 12:04 pmI could respect that if it was based on anything. I have a big problem with those that insist we should “free” Iran and not Darfur or Burma. Or vice-versa for that matter.
Comment by Jeff Molby — October 3, 2007 @ 5:46 pmI wouldn’t vote for anyone who thinks we ought to free the oppressed in Burma or Darfur either. Unless it’s directly related to our national security, we’ve got no business interfering in the internal affairs of other sovereign nations. That’s how we end up with disasters like Vietnam and Iraq.
Comment by UCrawford — October 3, 2007 @ 5:51 pmI said “respect”, not “vote”. :-)
If someone truly believes it’s our duty to rid the world of evil and suffering, I can respect that. I wouldn’t support him, but I could respect it.
But I absolutely loathe the hypocritical, opportunistic BS.
Comment by Jeff Molby — October 3, 2007 @ 6:10 pmI think if someone believes it’s our duty to rid the world of evil and suffering and that this end can be achieved through military action, they’re falling prey to a messianic fantasy.
I honestly believe that Bush thinks that this is what he’s doing and that it’s not just a clever political ploy. I also believe that Bush and the neo-conservatives who back him are as crazy as a bunch of shithouse rats…and far more dangerous.
Or, in the words of a man much smarter than myself:
“Those who seek absolute power, even though they seek it to do what they regard as good, are simply demanding the right to enforce their own version of heaven on earth. And let me remind you, they are the very ones who always create the most hellish tyrannies. Absolute power does corrupt, and those who seek it must be suspect and must be opposed. Their mistaken course stems from false notions of equality, ladies and gentlemen. Equality, rightly understood, as our founding fathers understood it, leads to liberty and to the emancipation of creative differences. Wrongly understood, as it has been so tragically in our time, it leads first to conformity and then to despotism.”
Comment by UCrawford — October 3, 2007 @ 6:48 pm