Monday, February 05, 2007

À SON AISE DANS SA PEAU!

If you do nothing else "political" this week, view and listen carefully to this video:

http://www.schotline.com/

It is a video of an interview of Rudy by Will Folks in South Carolina! It's all interesting, but the "must see" part is approximately the last half of the 7-minute piece. When asked how he would "present himself" to S.C. voters, he gives essentially a presentation of his "campaign stance" that I think is absolutely spot-on -- at once both honest and politically astute.

Whether or not someone supports Rudy for President, I don't see how anyone cannot like and respect him as a candidate. When compared to almost all other politicians, at least at the Presidential level, he comes across as a giant among pygmies! Rather than flip-flop, fudge, shade, obfuscate, cover-up, he takes a straightforward approach, essentially (I paraphrase): "This is what I believe. Now, let's focus on those things we agree on, and discuss those things on which we don't agree." He doesn't back off one inch on who he is and what he believes. As the French put it, he is “at ease in his own skin" ("à son aise dans sa peau").

He asks people only that they evaluate him “as a whole person, and as someone who will be honest with you” in judging him as a candidate. The only sad part is that our political discourse has sunk to such a level that Rudy, or any candidate, would feel it necessary to make this request. While not backing off, Rudy does point out, however, that the differences between his positions and those of social-conservative voters are not as great as his opponents have made them out to be. Surprise, surprise! Here again, I must quote the wisdom of Ed Koch: "If you agree with me on 9 out of 12 issues, vote for me! If you agree with me on 12 out of 12, see a psychiatrist!"

Now, a personal note: I wish I could take some small measure of credit for Rudy's presentation, but alas I cannot! I can say, however, that what he says is almost exactly what I have been saying he should say until I have become blue in the face. The positions he takes are virtually exactly identical to those that I have sussed out that he would hold, based on my knowledge of him as a public figure for almost 25 years, and more importantly because of how I have judged him as a man! For proof, read my postings in this space since July!

My ultimate conclusion: Run Rudy Run!

Thursday, February 01, 2007

THE “CONVENTIONAL WISDOM” - - -

IMPERVIOUS TO THE FACTS AS ALWAYS

An article by the Gallup Organization about its recent Poll of Republicans, conducted 25-28 January 2007, asserts/concedes that “Rudy Giuliani and John McCain [are] the clear frontrunners among the Republican Party’s 2008 presidential hopefuls.” In this poll, 31% said they would support Giuliani and 27% said McCain. When asked to choose between the two, however, Republicans show a “slight” [sic] preference for Giuliani over McCain at 50% to 42%, respectively. The complete article, the hard numbers, and all the cross-tabs are here:

http://www.galluppoll.com/content/default.aspx?ci=26341&pg=1

The substance of this new poll and article from the Gallup Organization is certainly good news for Rudy, though hardly surprising. I must say, however, that the "Conventional Wisdom" is still very much at work in the article describing the Poll.

The article’s author has done what can only be described as a disingenuous job of building up the McCain side of the poll's numbers and categories at Rudy's expense, to wit:

Rudy leads McCain by 4% in the overall horse race. He leads McCain by 8% in the head-to-head match-up, and in the cross-tabs, Rudy leads in 10 of 15 categories, including what can only be described as devastating leads with respect to crime (78%-17%), the economy (52%-38%), and terrorism (53%-41%). In the remaining five categories, Rudy is tied in two, while McCain leads in three. To express that in terms of a sports team’s record, Rudy's record against McCain would be 10-3-2.

Down in the "teeth" of the article, the Gallup Organization "concedes" that "Giuliani's perceived strengths are many, and the distance between Giuliani and McCain on some of these dimensions is very large" and "Overall, Giuliani appears to be very well positioned against McCain on many relevant and important dimensions".

Yet, the author goes out of his way to build up those relatively few areas in which McCain leads Rudy, so as, apparently, to enable him to make the overall assessment that the two candidates should essentially be considered together as "clear frontrunners". Well, if all one had to judge by were the facts presented in this article and poll, the only way in which the two should be considered together as "clear frontrunners" is that Rudy is clearly in first place, McCain is clearly in second place, and everyone else is clearly in no better than third place.

Moreover, the editors give the piece the headline "Giuliani, McCain Have Competing Strengths in Republicans' Eyes", obviously trying to fix the mindset of the reader, at the outset of the article, that neither man is leading the other, as well as to deflect attention-at-a-glance away from the hard numbers. Perhaps the most obvious "howler", however, is where the author terms Rudy's 8-point (50%-42%) in the head-to-head match-up as "slight".

I come back yet again to Deroy Murdock's observation: "The oddest thing about the conventional wisdom may be its almost bulletproof imperviousness to the facts." Indeed, here we have a purveyor of the "Conventional Wisdom" who appears to be impervious even to the facts that he himself is presenting. I would say that actually goes beyond being impervious to facts. It is downright dishonest.

Finally, as a friend of mine, who is close to Rudy personally, puts it: “I agree with you 100%. They can't come to grips with Rudy's strength in the Country and the Party”.

My ultimate conclusion: Run Rudy Run!

Tuesday, January 30, 2007

AMERICA’S MAYOR IN THE GRANITE STATE

A recent SurveyUSA New Hampshire Poll, released 29 January 2007, that is gaining quite a bit of Media attention, particularly in Boston and the Northeast, shows the following:

GOP:

Rudy: 33%

McCain: 32

Romney: 21

Other: 9

DEM:

Hillary: 40%

Obama: 25

Edwards 23

Other: 11

Nothing new on the Democrat side!

On the GOP side: Even though Rudy is shown to lead McCain in New Hampshire, by 1%, nevertheless I do agree with many commentators, in the blogosphere and elsewhere, that the general value of this latest SurveyUSA poll is quite low in estimating now what the Republican Primary will look like a year from now. Certainly, this Poll’s lack of value to Romney is even more apparent because he reached the 20% level of support ONLY because Newt was removed from consideration by the Pollsters, and this from what should be a State favourable to Romney as the immediate past Governor of neighboring Massachusetts.

That said, please allow me to share with you all again a report/analysis that I first published in this space, on 11 January 2007, and that I have also posted elsewhere in the blogosphere. This report/analysis is, in my judgment, absolutely vital to assessing the state of play in New Hampshire, and I don’t believe any other commentator has mentioned it in connection with this latest SurveyUSA Poll. As you read the following report/analysis, please bear in mind two other Poll results, with which readers of this space are quite familiar, but that seem to have been forgotten elsewhere in the blogosphere:

1. A recent Zogby New Hampshire Poll, conducted 15-17 January 2007, showed the following:

Republicans:

McCain 26%

Rudy 20%

Romney 13%

Condi 7%

Newt 6%

2. A recent Fox News New Poll, released on 07 January 2007, showed Rudy leading McCain by 29% to 24%,

Now the report/analysis:

“I heard an interesting tidbit last night [10 January] in Fox News' Chief Political Correspondent Carl Cameron's report on the ‘state of things’ in New Hampshire, which I think bears on my comments yesterday about the recent poll showing Rudy leading McCain by 29% to 24% in the Granite State, as well as on the New Hampshire Primary in general.

“This tidbit is set in the context of John McCain's 2000 Republican Primary trouncing of George Bush by 49% to 32%. Mr. Cameron talked to a New Hampshire Democrat ‘political insider’ who gave the following analysis: McCain's margin of victory in 2000 was the result largely of registered independent voters who ‘broke’ hugely for the Arizona Senator -- ‘Straight Talk Express’, and all that. The 2006 elections, however, ‘changed all that’. This past November, owing to the war in Iraq and all the other things we all know about, those same independent voters voted overwhelmingly for Democrats, giving the New Hampshire polity a political ‘cast’ at all levels that is hugely Democrat, in fact more so than at any previous time in the State's history. That's more-or-less ‘fact’. The ‘analysis’ is that those voters have cast their lot with the Democrat Party, at least for the foreseeable future, and will not therefore be voting in the Republican Primary in 2008.

“I do not necessarily ‘endorse’ this analysis, but at the same time, I have no reason to doubt it. In fact, it does sound rather intuitive, and it is certainly in consonance with all the ad nauseam Media blather we heard in the wake of the 2006 elections, about how the GOP ‘lost’ the Northeastern Republicans -- the old ‘Rockefeller Republicans’ -- perhaps for good. The ‘poster boy’ example, of course, was Lincoln Chafee, who lost his and his family's long-held Senate seat in Rhode Island, apparently for no other reason than that he had an ‘R’ after his name on the ballot. Moreover, the actual results in New Hampshire in 2006, do seem to support the analysis of Mr. Cameron's interlocutor.

“If the ‘analysis’, actually an educated prediction about voting patterns in the 2008 New Hampshire primaries, proves to be accurate, then, in the current through-the-looking-glass world in which we find ourselves, this can be only good news for Rudy. I put it that way because, in the normal year, independent New Hampshire voters, who customarily vote Republican in the primary, would be exactly the kind of voter one would expect to respond very well to Rudy. Thus, their loss to the Democrat Party should hurt Rudy’s primary electoral fortunes. This time round, however, the defection of those voters to the Democrats will mean principally that the support of Rudy's primary rival has been gutted! Couple that with the recent Fox News poll and the enormous and enthusiastic turn-out for Rudy's appearances in New Hampshire last fall, and it all adds up to a very good ‘alignment of the planets’ for America's Mayor in the Granite State!”

My ultimate conclusion: Run Rudy Run!

Thursday, January 25, 2007

JOHN McCAIN: FRONTRUNNER, BECAUSE . . .?

Please tell me again, O Vaunted Conventional Wisdom! Please enlighten me anew, O Revered Beltway Punditocracy. In the race for the GOP’s 2008 Presidential Nomination: John McCain is the “Frontrunner” because . . . ? Mitt Romney is the “3rd of the Big 3”, or indeed even a “serious candidate”, because . . . ?

In addition to the eight separate polls by American Research Group (ARG), in eight significant Primary States – polls showing Rudy with solid leads in seven of the eight – that I commented on the day before yesterday, there have been no less than five other recent polls of significant note. Below are the numbers, followed by even more significant commentary from an arch-denizen of the MSM, and purveyor of the “Conventional Wisdom”. Chris Cillizza, one of the WaPo’s own Political Columnist/Analysts.

Mr. Cillizza’s commentary is significant, not merely because of his position in the “camp of the enemy”, but particularly for what he says. He parses the WaPo/ABC News poll and shows the internal numbers or “cross tabs”. This is significant for at least two reasons:

(1) This is the closest I have seen a card-carrying member of the Beltway Punditocracy come to admitting that Rudy should be regarded at this moment as the Frontrunner “on the ground”, and

(2) The internal numbers show Rudy with significant and solid leads over John McCain among Women, among Married Women (even bigger lead), among Moderate Republicans (somewhat surprising), and (mirabile dictu), among self-identified Conservatives.

Now I grant you, it is clear from the tone of Cillizza’s commentary, that he still considers McCain to be the Frontrunner, and he assumes that Rudy’s numbers are inflated by his 9/11 performance, and that those numbers will fall as Rudy’s “negatives” become known. After all, Cillizza is an MSM sheep, so why shouldn’t he bleat like one? Nevertheless, his parsing of the numbers is worth reading.

Even if the following numbers give you a MEGO effect, please scan them quickly and read the following commentary. I promise you, you will not be disappointed.

My ultimate conclusion: Run Rudy Run!

________________________________

January 25, 2007

Poll Alert: Quinnipiac Shows Rudy New Jersey

Quinnipiac has come out with a presidential primary poll of New Jersey voters. Rudy Giuliani holds a wide lead, among Registered Republicians for the GOP Nomination:

[NB: The three numbers represent “total”, “men”, and “women”.]

Giuliani 39% 35% 43%

McCain 21% 22% 21%

Gingrich 11% 17% 5%

Romney 5% 6% 5%

[Next highest was George Pataki at 3%]

________________________________

January 23, 2007

Poll Alert: Rassmussen 2008 GOP & General Election

Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of 571 Likely Republican Primary Voters was conducted by Rasmussen Reports January 15-18, 2007. The margin of sampling error for the survey is +/- 4 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence (results reported may not be complete-KWN):

Rudy Giuliani 30%
John McCain 22%
Newt Gingrich 12%
Mitt Romney 10%

[Next highest were Mike Huckabee and Sam Brownback, tied at 2%]

_________________________________

January 24, 2007

Angus Reid Global Monitor : Polls & Research

Republicans 2008: Giuliani 34%, McCain 27%

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Rudy Giuliani remains the most popular presidential hopeful for Republican Party supporters in the United States, according to a poll by TNS released by the Washington Post and ABC News. 34 per cent of respondents would support the former New York City mayor in a 2008 primary.

[NB: The first number listed reflects the survey taken in Jan. 2007, and the second number listed reflects Nov. 2006.]

Rudy Giuliani 34% 34%

John McCain 27% 26%

Mitt Romney 9% 5%

Newt Gingrich 9% 12%

[Next highest was George Pataki at 2%/ 3%]

_________________________________

January 19-21, 2007

Poll Alert: Strategic Vision Iowa

600 likely Republican caucus goers:


Rudy Giuliani 25%
John McCain 21%
Newt Gingrich 13%
Mitt Romney 8%

_________________________________

Saturday, Jan. 20, 2007

Washington Post-ABC News Poll

This poll was conducted by telephone January 16-19, 2007, among a random national sample of 1,000 adults. The results have a three-point error margin. Sampling, data collection and tabulation by TNS of Horsham, Pa.

(ASKED OF LEANED REPUBLICANS) If the 2008 Republican presidential primary or caucus in your state were being held today, for whom would you vote?

[NB: The first number listed reflects the survey taken 19 Jan. 2007, and the second number listed reflects 11 Dec. 2006.]

Rudy Giuliani 34% 34%

John McCain 27% 26%

Mitt Romney 9% 5%

Newt Gingrich 9 % 12%

[Next highest was Tommy Thompson at 1% and 2%]

Now, as I promised, here is the “parsing of the numbers” from the WaPo’s own Political Columnist/Analyst:

“Turning to the Republicans, the only subgroup comparisons worth making at the moment are between Giuliani and Sen. John McCain (Ariz.). None of the other potential candidates garner enough support to make the slicing and dicing of their numbers insightful.

“Overall, Giuliani led McCain 34 percent to 27 percent. No other candidate nudged into double figures; former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich (Ga.) each received nine percent.

“Drilling down into the numbers, the first thing that becomes clear is that Giuliani's lead is the result of a somewhat striking gender gap. While Giuliani and McCain both take 32 percent among men, Hizzoner leads McCain 35 percent to 22 percent among women. Among married men and women the gap is even larger. Married men favor McCain by a 36 percent to 30 percent margin; married women go for Giuliani 40 percent to 20 percent. Are these married women the "security moms" over whom so much ink was spilled in the 2004 election? Is Giuliani's lead among females tied to his handling of Sept. 11, 2001 and the belief that he can best keep the country safe from future attack? And will these numbers move when details of Giuliani's personal life, which have been fodder for the New York tabloids, become more widely known?

“The other intriguing contrast in the McCain/Giuliani numbers come when voters are broken down by ideology. Moderate Republican voters go for Giuliani 37 percent to 32 percent -- not terribly surprising given that the former mayor is clearly the most moderate/liberal candidate in the field. Self-identified conservatives chose Giuliani 33 percent to 21 percent.

“The twelve-point bulge for Giuliani among conservatives reveals two things. First, Giuliani's Sept. 11 aura appears at the moment to be masking or eclipsing his liberal social views in the eyes of conservative voters. Second, although McCain agrees with conservatives on most issues he still bears the lingering scars of the 2000 campaign when he was cast -- wrongly his staff argues -- as the moderate alternative to the conservative George W. Bush.

“For McCain to win the nomination he must hope that these conservatives decide he is the best combination of a candidate who generally supports their views and who can also win in November 2008. Romney is gunning for these influential conservative voters but could struggle due to his evolving position on social issues. Enter Gingrich or even Sen. Sam Brownback (Kans.).”

Wednesday, January 24, 2007

IN DEFENSE OF DISCUSSION!

As most of you know, I visit frequently a web-site called “Race 4 2008” (http://race42008.com/). Sometimes, I post a comment. When I do, this comment usually leads to a similar posting here, almost always after I have revised it. “Race 4 2008” provides a forum for discussion centered around the race for the GOP’s Presidential nomination in 2008. In addition, the sponsors of that site rate the current and potential Republican candidates in what they call “Power Rankings” Since 29 November 2006, these Power Rankings have had Rudy and McCain in a tie for first place with Romney in third and Newt in fourth, and all the others lined up thereafter, more or less as one might expect. Recently, some supporters of Romney, and indeed, even some supporters of Mike Huchabee, accused the organizers of the site of being “biased” in favour of Rudy in the Power Rankings. This led to a spirited debate! I thought that readers of this site might be interested to see what I had to say. Here it is:

I must come to the defense of this site. I have been a regular visitor, and sometime commentator, since last June/July. As I have groked the purpose of this site, it is intended to present a forum for open political discussion – centered around the contest for the GOP’s Presidential nomination in 2008 -- not to strive for metaphysical clarity or rectitude. In my judgment, the site succeeds admirably in its purpose. I have seen some of the most absolutely inane and puerile opinions expressed here, opinions that strain my own commitment to civil discourse to the breaking point. I have also seen opinions evidencing great sagacity, maturity, and insight -- verging on real profundity. I have seen everything in between. My overall seat-of-the-pants assessment of the site’s content would weigh distinctly toward the latter, rather than the former. Moreover, these disparate opinions are expressed by a huge number of contributors, apparently from all across the country. For a discussion forum, gentlemen, that is real success!

Before I turn to the issue of the “Power Rankings”, a bit of disclosure is in order. There is no question that I support Rudy Giuliani for the Presidency in 2008! See: “Run Rudy Run”. During Rudy’s tenure as U.S. Attorney in New York in the 1980’s, I was a practicing attorney and negotiated with his office on more than a few occasions. I supported Ron Lauder against Rudy in the 1989 Mayoral Primary. Subsequently, I saw the error of my ways and supported Rudy in all his three runs for Gracie Mansion. All that said, I have been involved in Republican politics since 1960, when I handed out leaflets on the street corner for Richard Nixon. I covered the 1968 Democrat convention in Chicago as a reporter for my college newspaper. My first foray into politics as other than a volunteer or journalist was in the short-lived 1982 Senate campaign of Republican Mike Seymour in New York. I have truly “seen it all”.

As for the “Power Rankings”: Ranking Rudy and McCain as “tied” for the status of “frontrunner” seems to me a very thoughtful and creative way to address a somewhat ambiguous and confusing, if not unique, situation. At this point in time, every single hard fact-on-the-ground places Rudy as the clear frontrunner, with McCain a distinct second, albeit not terribly far back. No one else is even close. At the same time, the “Conventional Wisdom”, the MSM, the Beltway Punditocracy, and the “Wise Men” of Washington, all virtually unanimously rate McCain as the frontrunner, even to the point of disdaining or ignoring Rudy. Then there is the nagging suspicion, even among some of his supporters -- though not I -- that Rudy will ultimately eschew actually running. Finally, there is the inescapable fact that not a single meaningful vote has yet been cast. Without trying here to assess the underlying reasons for this situation -- as National Review’s Deroy Murdock puts it: "[t]he oddest thing about the conventional wisdom may be its almost bulletproof imperviousness to the facts” -- the question nevertheless presents itself: What’s an honest power ranker to do? As I say, the “tie” seems to me a thoughtful and creative answer.

As for the rest of the rankings: Romney (3rd) and Newt (4th) were, when these rankings were last updated, and still are, the only other potential candidates who had/have shown any objective sign of breaking away from the rest of the pack, though neither has shown any objective sign of actually challenging Rudy or McCain. As I have shown in other postings on this site, Newt has of late -- though he still insists he has not made the decision to run and will not run unless the top-tier candidates falter -- significantly out-performed Romney, who has actually formed an Exploratory Committee. At same time, there are those on this site and elsewhere who firmly insist that Romney is “the 3rd of the Big 3”, or that he will leap into the lead when his poll numbers rise and Rudy’s decline, or some such thing, all with absolutely no objective evidence to support their wishful thinking. Ho-hum; whatever! In my view, these two, Newt and Romney, should be viewed at this point in time as the only “other” potential candidates who have even a glimmer of hope of competing seriously for the nomination, and that’s just where the Power Rankings have them: in 3rd and 4th place, the specific order is irrelevant.

Below that, there’s no one yet that I am willing to take the time even to consider. By that, I do not mean to denigrate any of them. Some of them are very fine men and government officials. I actually like Mike Huckabee, and I have known Jim Gilmore for almost 50 years. [Note: Jim is not currently in the Power Rankings because (I assume), when they were last up-dated, he had not yet formed his Exploratory Committee.] That said, for a mature, indeed sentient, human being to opine seriously that “Huckabee will come through” or “I prefer Tom Tancredo over Duncan Hunter, or vice versa”, or “Jim Gilmore is the only true conservative in the race”, or “Condi Rice will ultimately be drafted by the American People”, is, in my judgment at this time, nothing more than mental masturbation.

My ultimate conclusion: Run Rudy Run!

Tuesday, January 23, 2007

TO THE TINTINNABULATION THAT SO MUSICALLY ROLLS FROM THE POLLS, POLLS, POLLS, POLLS, POLLS, POLLS, POLLS!

Below are the eight-state Republican Primary Poll numbers released by American Research Group (ARG) on 22 January 2007, i.e., Michigan, Missouri, Florida, Pennsylvania, Illinois, New Mexico, California, and North Carolina. But, first . . .

My tally of place finishes:

Rudy: 7 firsts 1 second

McCain: 1 first 5 seconds 2 thirds

Newt: 2 seconds 4 thirds 2 fourths

Romney: 2 thirds 1 fourth 3 fifth 2 sixth

_______________________________

My tally of average race-by-race percentage:

Rudy: 31.9

McCain: 22.9

Newt: 12.0

Romney: 04.9

_________________________________

My tally of these 8 States' 2008 Electoral Votes:

Rudy: 161

i.e., 59.6% of total needed to win the General Election

McCain: 11

Newt: -0-

Romney: -0-

_________________________________

My tally of the Newt-Romney Match-up:

Average Percent: Newt 12.0 Romney 04.9

Higher ranking: Newt 6 Romney 2

Electoral Votes: Newt 134 Romney 28

Double figures: Newt 5 Romney 2

Second Place: Newt 2 Romney 0

Third Place: Newt 4 Romney 2

Fourth Place: Newt 2 Romney 1

Fifth Place: Romney 3 Newt 0

Sixth Place: Romney 2 Newt 0 Gilmore 2

Don't forget: Newt isn't even running!

_________________________________

Now, if I understand the litany of the MSM, the "Conventional Wisdom", and the Beltway Punditocracy correctly, all this means that: (1) Rudy's numbers will go down, but Mitt's numbers will come up. (2) At worst, Romney is the third of the "Big Three" Republican candidates. In a word: Hogwash! In a phrase: Utter Hogwash! In a sentence: These people are deluding themselves!

My ultimate conclusion: Run Rudy Run!

My penultimate conclusion: Newt for Veep!

_________________________________

January 22, 2007

Poll Alert: 8 State Poll from ARG

Michigan
Giuliani 34%
McCain 24%
Romney 10%
Gingrich 9%
Thompson 7%
Huckabee 2%
Undecided 14%
Under 1%: Brownback, Gilmore, Hagel, Hunter, Pataki

Missouri
McCain 31%
Giuliani 18%
Gingrich 14%
Brownback 5%
Hagel 3%
Romney 2%
Thompson 2%
Huckabee 1%
Undecided 24%
Under 1%: Gilmore, Hunter, Pataki

Florida
Giuliani 30%
Gingrich 16%
McCain 15%
Hagel 2%
Romney 2%
Huckabee 1%
Brownback 1%
Pataki 1%
Undecided 32%
Under 1%: Gilmore, Hunter, Thompson

Pennsylvania
Giuliani 35%
McCain 25%
Gingrich 10%
Hagel 4%
Brownback 2%
Gilmore 1%
Huckabee 1%
Romney 1%
Undecided 21%
Under 1%: Hunter, Pataki, Thompson

Illinois
Giuliani 33%
McCain 24%
Romney 12%
Gingrich 8%
Brownback 4%
Thompson 4%
Hagel 3%
Hunter 1%
Undecided 11%
Under 1%: Gilmore, Huckabee, Pataki

New Mexico
Giuliani 38%
McCain 20%
Gingrich 9%
Romney 7%
Hagel 6%
Brownback 4%
Pataki 1%
Undecided 15%
Under 1%: Gilmore, Huckabee, Hunter, Thompson

California
Giuliani 33%
Gingrich 19%
McCain 18%
Hagel 5%
Romney 3%
Hunter 1%
Undecided 22%
Under 1%: Brownback, Gilmore, Huckabee, Pataki, Thompson

North Carolina
Giuliani 34%
McCain 26%
Gingrich 11%
Huckabee 4%
Hagel 2%
Romney 2%
Gilmore 1%
Undecided: 21%
Under 1%: Brownback, Hunter, Pataki, Thompson

Friday, January 19, 2007

NEW ZOGBY NEW HAMPSHIRE POLL!

The Zogby Organization has released a new New Hanpshire poll. The Democratic and Republican live operator telephone surveys were conducted Jan. 15-17, 2007. The Democratic poll included 502 respondents and carries a margin of error of +/- 4.5 percentage points. The Republican survey included 503 respondents and carries a margin of error of +/- 4.5 percentage points. The numbers:

Republicans:

John McCain 26%

Rudy Giuliani 20%

Mitt Romney 13%

Condi Rice 7%

Newt Gingrich 6%

Chuck Hagel 3%

Tom Tancredo 2%

Duncan Hunter 1%

George Pataki 1%

Ron Paul 1%

Unsure 15%

Democrats:

Barack Obama 23%

Hillary Clinton 19%

John Edwards 19%

John Kerry 5%

Wes Clark 3%

Joe Biden 3%

Dennis Kucinich 1%

Bill Richardson 1%

Tom Vilsack 1%

Unsure 22%

Here, I will say the same thing about Zogby/New Hampshire that I did about Zogby/Iowa:

“The Zogby organization is downright notorious for polling to the "Left", both among Republicans and among Democrats. In my almost 40 years of studying political polls, I have noticed that the Zogby poll, for however long its been around -- I don't remember exactly -- has consistently been an outlier to the left. Hence, Rudy is down from the 30%-18% lead he enjoyed over McCain among Iowa Caucus Workers in August, and Hillary is tied for third place, some 11 points behind Class Warrior Edwards.”

Further to this point: I would remind everyone that a Fox News poll, released on 07 January 2007, had Rudy leading McCain in New Hampshire Poll by 29% to 24%.

Further still to this point, because I think it quite significant, I would offer yet again the following two observations, one each about Iowa and New Hampshire, which I have recently posted in this space:

Posted: 15 January 2007:

RUDY HAS STAR POWER IN IOWA!

The "Krusty Konservative", a blog concentrating on Iowa, has commented recently on the 2008 Iowa caucuses. The money quote is this, and if you are a regular reader of this blog, said quote more-or-less speaks for itself, needing no further embellishment from me:

"So while McCain starts to attack Romney, and Romney will likely fire back, a huge opportunity will be created in Iowa for an alternative kandidate to emerge. We have discussed in depth that there is a huge void that exists in Iowa for a kredible konservative kandidate, but I also think it might now be an opportune time for Rudy Giuliani to make a foray into Iowa.

"Giuliani will face many of the same obstacles that McCain faces, but what makes Rudy different than McCain is he does have a silver bullet, star power. Giuliani is a celebrity, and if uses that advantage he could really make some noise in Iowa. Now, I'm not a fan of Rudy's positions on the social issues, but when it comes to leadership and toughness he is off the charts. I also think that Giuliani might be the only Republican kandidate who can recapture the national security issues that has delivered victories for Bush and Republicans in 2002 and 2004. I'm still not konvinced that Rudy will play in Iowa, but if he does it will be extremely interesting to watch."

Posted: 11 January 2007:

MORE ON NEW HAMPSHIRE

I heard an interesting tidbit last night in Fox News' Chief Political Correspondent Carl Cameron's report on the "state of things" in New Hampshire, which I think bears on my comments yesterday about the recent poll showing Rudy leading McCain by 29% to 24% in the Granite State, as well as on the New Hampshire Primary in general.

This tidbit is set in the context of John McCain's 2000 Republican Primary trouncing of George Bush by 49% to 32%. Mr. Cameron talked to a New Hampshire Democrat "political insider" who gave the following analysis: McCain's margin of victory in 2000 was the result largely of registered independent voters who "broke" hugely for the Arizona Senator -- "Straight Talk Express", and all that. The 2006 elections, however, "changed all that". This past November, owing to the war in Iraq and all the other things we all know about, those same independent voters voted overwhelmingly for Democrats, giving the New Hampshire polity a political "cast" at all levels that is hugely Democrat, in fact more so than at any previous time in the State's history. That's more-or-less "fact". The "analysis" is that those voters have cast their lot with the Democrat Party, at least for the foreseeable future, and will not therefore be voting in the Republican Primary in 2008.

I do not necessarily "endorse" this analysis, but at the same time, I have no reason to doubt it. In fact, it does sound rather intuitive, and it is certainly in consonance with all the ad nauseam Media blather we heard in the wake of the 2006 elections, about how the GOP "lost" the Northeastern Republicans -- the old "Rockefeller Republicans" -- perhaps for good. The "poster boy" example, of course, was Lincoln Chafee, who lost his and his family's long-held Senate seat in Rhode Island, apparently for no other reason than that he had an "R" after his name on the ballot. Moreover, the actual results in New Hampshire in 2006, do seem to support the analysis of Mr. Cameron's interlocutor.

If the "analysis", actually an educated prediction about voting patterns in the 2008 New Hampshire primaries, proves to be accurate, then, in the current through-the-looking-glass world in which we find ourselves, this can be only good news for Rudy. I put it that way because, in the normal year, independent New Hampshire voters, who customarily vote Republican in the primary, would be exactly the kind of voter one would expect to respond very well to Rudy. Thus, their loss to the Democrat Party should hurt Rudy’s primary electoral fortunes. This time round, however, the defection of those voters to the Democrats will mean principally that the support of Rudy's primary rival has been gutted! Couple that with the recent Fox News poll and the enormous and enthusiastic turn-out for Rudy's appearances in New Hampshire last fall, and it all adds up to a very good "alignment of the planets" for America's Mayor in the Granite State!

My ultimate conclusion: Run Rudy Run!